The Trinity Doctrine

[Proclaimer]

True Elidad.

Ephesians 5:12-14
13 But everything exposed by the light becomes visible,
14 for it is light that makes everything visible. This is why it is said:
“Wake up, O sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

So we should we using scripture to teach, correct, expose, and rebuke.

But we shouldn't use scripture to condemn.

[Elidad]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 21 2006,20:27)

True Elidad. Ephesians 5:12-14 13 But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, 14 for it is light that makes everything visible. This is why it is said: “Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.” 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, So we should we using scripture to teach, correct, expose, and rebuke. But we shouldn't use scripture to condemn.

Agree indeed t8. But there is need to ensure that we aren't just playing “spiritual” ping pong and sharpening the wrong swords. The debate over the Trinity seems, from my observations, to be doing just that at times.

As I read the to-ing and fro-ing that has been going on in this Forum on this particular subject, I keep asking myself how would Christ address this matter? Are we going about this in keeping with His example and desire, and that of His Apostles whom He specially trained?

In my honest opinion, the entire issue of the trinity rests with understanding what the Holy Spirit said through Moses and Christ, as recorded in Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:29.

How did the Spirit intend us to hear and read these statements?

Like this:

“Hear O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord”

or like this:

“Hear O Israel, the Lord your God is (a three in) one Lord”

If we can't get agreement on this foundation statement, then we can argue until the cows come home on all the other references that get bandied about, all to no avail.

How we understand this statement, governs how we read all other texts where God is referred to as being 'one'. Are we to take them to mean 'one' in an absoloute sense, or as 'three in one'?

Proverbs 30:5 says, “Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.”

If God's word is pure, then we can accept the meaning conveyed by the original statement. It is clear, unambiguous and without equivocation.

However, we can only obtain the meaning, as indicated by the modified rendering, by adding to God's word. READER and HEARER BE AWARE!

Either God means what He says and says what He means, or we resort to Serpent thinking, which states that God does not say what He means or mean what He says, which was how Eve was brought unstuck in the garden of Eden – (Genesis 3:1-5).

On the matter of the Trinity, my question is, who should we listen to, God, or the Serpent?

The argument used in regard to the Hebrew word echad, translated into english as 'one', as referring to a compound unity rather than a simple unity does not stack up.

Elidad

[He’s Coming in the Clouds]

Scripture will sort the truth from the lies. If false teaching are being taught, the scripture is like a double-edged sword. It will cut it to the quick. For darkness gives way to light.

[Elidad]

Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ Aug. 21 2006,22:43)

Scripture will sort the truth from the lies. If false teaching are being taught, the scripture is like a double-edged sword. It will cut it to the quick. For darkness gives way to light.

Well said h.i.c.i.t.c, That is why it is so important to take God at His word. We need to get back to basics. The basic statements that the Spirit spoke and caused to be recorded. Deuteronomy 6:4 is about as basic as you can get, with regard to a declaration about what God is. He is one Lord. Not two, not three, but one.

Could the Spirit say it any clearer? If this statement says He is “three in one” what should He have expected to Him to say, to make it clearer that He is a Unity?

Elidad

[Proclaimer]

Hi Elidad.

The Trinity doctrine discussion ping pongs to some degree because supporters of that doctrine come up with all kinds of accusations against us and we are simply defendeding that which we have written. We are ready to give an answer to what we believe.

So we may ping and then they pong, but sometimes to such a degree that something has to be said to get rid of the smell.

Also the Trinity doctrine is one of the biggest delusions in the world today and so our teaching will be questioned all the more, simply because of the importance that this doctrine holds for it is written in 1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

So giving an answer to what we teach and believe is acceptable.

Ephesians 5:11
Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

It is also useful for readers who are questioning the Trinity doctrine to see answers to ALL the accusations against us and our stand and also all the accusations against the Trinity doctrine itself. This way they can be more sure that this doctrine isn't scriptural. We have nothing to hide.

It is true that some come here not because they are searching for truth, but to condemn us and our teaching. But let them be like Saul if that is what they want. Hopefully one day they will be converted into Paul. From approving persecution against us to becoming someone useful in the purposes of God.

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Indeed orthodox “christianity” presents more dangers than we do.

False teachers have arisen among them who take no cogniscence of the importance of the scriptures only being used in defining the doctrines of the Body of Christ.

And shamefully these teachings, such as trinity which denies Jesus is the Son of God, have become orthodoxy, deceiving millions even today.

2Peter 2
“1But (A)false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be (B)false teachers ©among you, who will (D)secretly introduce (E)destructive heresies, even (F)denying the (G)Master who (H)bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.”

[Elidad]

Hi t8 and Nick, To some extent I agree with much of what you have just said, but my point is, we don't need to play “ping pong” with Scripture.

Serpent thinking is good at quoting Scripture, such was the line of attack with Jesus in the wilderness temptation. But Jesus dismissed the accusers challenge with a“its is written” response. We need a lot more of “it is written” than just “shooting from the hip” comments. Oh yes, we are using Scriptual responses, but what appears to be happening with all the dialog that goes on, is we keep getting drawn away from the basic issue and get caught up in a verbal war, in a tit-for-tat type scenario.

Jesus used Scripture in such way that he didn't leave His accuser anywhere to go, other than to depart and leave Him alone; well at least for a season so it says, until another round of attack could be dreamt up. If He couldn't be beat quoting Scripture, the next best tactic was to get Him killed. Right? In times gone by that is exactly what they did to anyone who denied the trinity understanding. However, our adversaries are not quite as open about that now, but from experience, I have found that many think such in their heart.

With the trinity topic, which it seems I agree with you to some considerable extent, (but I am not sure what the alternative is since you Nick, made that comment that both the trinitarian and biblical unitarian viewpoints are nonsense) the case for or against it must rest with foundational statements. If agreement on foundation statements, made by God about Himself, can't be reached, then we are wasting our time jumping all over the place.

As I just said in my earlier post, the statement by God through Moses and Christ, as recorded in Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:29 are about as basic and foundational as you can get.

It is here that the case for the Trinity must be made or broken. It is pointless using other Scriptures to defend the trinitarian viewpoint, if these two references are really the underlying stumbling block. So our trinitarian friends need to be taken back to this point and if we can't get resolutiont here, about what God wanted us to understand, then we can talk until we are blue in the face, and it wont make one iota of difference.

So my appeal to all trinitarians is, who will you believe? What God said through Moses and Christ, or what the Serpent would have us believe.

This is God's viewpoint: “Hear O Israel the Lord your God is one Lord” As Jesus said, “It is written”

whereas the Serpent's viewpoint is:

“Hear O Israel the Lord your God, is (a three in) one Lord. This understanding amounts to, “adding to the word of God” Nowhere do we find written, “a three in one“

End of story!

Elidad

[NickHassan]

Hi Elidad,
If only it was that simple and people were openminded and willing to listen to the Scriptures and let God build truth into them once they are resting on the Foundation stone.

The eye of the needle cannot allow men and their camels to pass through carrying a load of traditional doctrines though many still try to force the poor beast through.

Any trinitarian worth his salt will agree God is one, but will add unscripturally
“with three persons within Him”.

Thus they deny the Son of God's existence and divide God from His own Spirit.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Elidad @ Aug. 22 2006,23:49)

Hi t8 and Nick, To some extent I agree with much of what you have just said, but my point is, we don't need to play “ping pong” with Scripture. Serpent thinking is good at quoting Scripture, such was the line of attack with Jesus in the wilderness temptation. But Jesus dismissed the accusers challenge with a“its is written” response. We need a lot more of “it is written” than just “shooting from the hip” comments. Oh yes, we are using Scriptual responses, but what appears to be happening with all the dialog that goes on, is we keep getting drawn away from the basic issue and get caught up in a verbal war, in a tit-for-tat type scenario. Jesus used Scripture in such way that he didn't leave His accuser anywhere to go, other than to depart and leave Him alone; well at least for a season so it says, until another round of attack could be dreamt up. If He couldn't be beat quoting Scripture, the next best tactic was to get Him killed. Right? In times gone by that is exactly what they did to anyone who denied the trinity understanding. However, our adversaries are not quite as open about that now, but from experience, I have found that many think such in their heart. With the trinity topic, which it seems I agree with you to some considerable extent, (but I am not sure what the alternative is since you Nick, made that comment that both the trinitarian and biblical unitarian viewpoints are nonsense) the case for or against it must rest with foundational statements. If agreement on foundation statements, made by God about Himself, can't be reached, then we are wasting our time jumping all over the place. As I just said in my earlier post, the statement by God through Moses and Christ, as recorded in Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:29 are about as basic and foundational as you can get. It is here that the case for the Trinity must be made or broken. It is pointless using other Scriptures to defend the trinitarian viewpoint, if these two references are really the underlying stumbling block. So our trinitarian friends need to be taken back to this point and if we can't get resolutiont here, about what God wanted us to understand, then we can talk until we are blue in the face, and it wont make one iota of difference. So my appeal to all trinitarians is, who will you believe? What God said through Moses and Christ, or what the Serpent would have us believe. This is God's viewpoint: “Hear O Israel the Lord your God is one Lord” As Jesus said, “It is written” whereas the Serpent's viewpoint is: “Hear O Israel the Lord your God, is (a three in) one Lord. This understanding amounts to, “adding to the word of God” Nowhere do we find written, “a three in one“ End of story! Elidad

I agree with you Elidad.

We need to get them to face scripture and reply to that.
If they ignore that, then they are not worth our God given time.

The problem sometimes is that Trinitarians quote the very scriptures that condemn their doctrine as support for their doctrine. E.g., God being one is also used by Trinitarians who say one God, 3 persons. So sometimes scripture needs to be analysed more closely than just quoting it in English, in order to show the readers why we shouldn't follow their teaching.

[Elidad]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 22 2006,02:04)

Hi Elidad, If only it was that simple and people were openminded and willing to listen to the Scriptures and let God build truth into them once they are resting on the Foundation stone. The eye of the needle cannot allow men and their camels to pass through carrying a load of traditional doctrines though many still try to force the poor beast through. Any trinitarian worth his salt will agree God is one, but will add unscripturally “with three persons within Him”. Thus they deny the Son of God's existence and divide God from His own Spirit.

Certainly true Nick, but aren't we to blame for not keeping it simple, by getting drawn into all sorts of circular reasoning, double-talk and the like. Our Lord never allowed Himself to be so drawn.

In the case of the temptation in the wilderness, the issues were dealt with clearly and decisively. Jesus dealt with misquoted Scripture, and Scripture quoted out of context with great wisdom, pressing home to His adversary the fact that “it is written”.

So on the question of the trinity “it is written” HEAR O ISRAEL THE LORD YOUR GOD IS ONE LORD.

What is not written is, Hear O Israel the Lord your God is a 'three in' one Lord”.

The Serpent thinking can do all it likes with those original words, spoken by God through Moses and Christ, and it will never be able to change the fact that “it is written” and it means exactly what it says.

Incredible mental and verbal gymnastics have been attempted with this clear statement made by God, and the fact remains unchanged, “Hear O Israel the Lord your God is one Lord” not as some would argue, 'three Lords in one'.

Forget all other arguments, subtle and deceptive reasoning, the case as stated remains as firm as a rock. Do we have to go elsewhere to make the point? Yes, there are many Scriptures that can be drawn on to show that God is one, but if this one alone can't be accepted, another 50 or more wont change the picture.

Enough said.

Elidad

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Elidad @ Aug. 23 2006,00:47)

Forget all other arguments, subtle and deceptive reasoning, the case as stated remains as firm as a rock. Do we have to go elsewhere to make the point? Yes, there are many Scriptures that can be drawn on to show that God is one, but if this one alone can't be accepted, another 50 or more wont change the picture.

True.

For some it doesn't matter how many scriptures.

But I do know that some are also convinced that the Trinity is bogus when they read something a bit more substantial than say one verse, even if that verse is very clear.

I don't think many are convinced by one verse. But when we see a number of witnesses and also how the Trinitarians twist scripture to suit their own interpretations that convinces those who are truly seeking truth.

I am willing to go an extra mile for them, and let's face it the Trinity doctrine is so widespreadly accepted that most will need more than 1 verse.

To a new believer 1 verse may be enough, but to the brainwashed majority, they need something more akin to therapy or a thorough study before they become convinced.

But as you say, some will ignore 50 verses and personally speaking I agree that it is not productive to spend your precious time on such people. I usually ignore these kinds when I find out that they are not interested in truth. I have done otherwise on a few occassions for different reasons.

One reason is to show a false accusation for what it is. For the light shows it up and exposes it.

[Elidad]

Elidad,Aug. wrote:

[/quote]
Many thanks t8. Let's indeed stick to basics an cut out all the cufuffle that goes on with this subject of the trinity. I feel certain that our Lord would have none of it.

Let's look at all the cases where Jesus was subject to false accusation; adversarial comments and remarks, and it will be noted that He didn't “beat about the bush” so to speak. His responses were to the point, and understood by those who had ears to hear, but wrestled against by those who thought otherwise, and quite often were fully misunderstood. Take the case of eating his flesh and drinking his blood. How many understood and misunderstood His remarks made on that particular occasion?

It is true, that if we are not really looking for truth, but are more interested in being defensive about out standpoint, because it is entangled with so many other related notions, we will always miss hearing the intended message.

Why can't God's statement “Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord” be taken for what its says, because to do so, the entire house that the other viewpoint has been built on, must come tumbling down. To many, that is asking just too much.

That is why the religious establishment in the time of Jesus rejected seeing Him as the Messiah. They realised that if such was truly the case, then their entire framework of thinking was wrong. It takes a very brave and courageous person to admit that they are totally wrong.

Perhaps, what I should say is, that it takes much humility to face up to the fact that our thinking might be askew. Loss of face is a hard matter to deal with at times.

Elidad

[Elidad]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 22 2006,03:10)

I don't think many are convinced by one verse. But when we see a number of witnesses and also how the Trinitarians twist scripture to suit their own interpretations that convinces those who are truly seeking truth.

I wonder about what you say here t8.

Let’s bear in mind that the children of Israel had just been called out of Egypt, where they were exposed to a people who believed in many Gods, of whom Osiris, Isis and Nephthys figured prominently. Yet, God basically used one single statement to Israel for the purpose of realigning their thinking.

By making this statement to Moses, was He not clearly differentiating Himself, from the many Gods of Egypt who were virtually presided over by a triad? Or, are we to believe, as some suggest, that God was making a statement that gave them a more profound way of believing in what the Eygptians were already subscribing to? That is, there really was more than one aspect to God? In other words, instead of thinking of God as separate entities like Osiris, Isis and Nephthys, He wanted them to see him as three Gods in one.

Is this what Deuteronomy 6:4 is really saying? If this is the case, then the choice of words used is extremely misleading, as for centuries the Jews have fiercely contested any such idea, and have argued strongly against the view, that Deuteronomy 6:4 in anyway supports the idea of a tri-person God.

So it would seem, that God expected the people at that time, to take Him at His word, virtually a single, stand alone satement, even after they had been expoused to other religious viewpoints, that no doubt had coloured the thinking of many.

Elidad

[Proclaimer]

Hi Elidad.

First I want to thank you for your input and I can see that you are a diligent person. I also want to thank you for your words.

I personally think it is okay to convince all men as to the faith and I also think that we should expose false doctrine for what it is, especially to those who are under it.

What do you think of the following scripture:

2 Corinthians 10:5
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

I can see your point and I agree that we shouldn't waste our time with those who refuse scripture, but is not good to expose false doctrine too, after all those doctrines are against the knowledge of God.

[Elidad]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 22 2006,06:50)

Hi Elidad. First I want to thank you for your input and I can see that you are a diligent person. I also want to thank you for your words. I personally think it is okay to convince all men as to the faith and I also think that we should expose false doctrine for what it is, especially to those who are under it. What do you think of the following scripture: 2 Corinthians 10:5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. I can see your point and I agree that we shouldn't waste our time with those who refuse scripture, but is not good to expose false doctrine too, after all those doctrines are against the knowledge of God.

Hi t8, In effect, I think we are virtually on the same wave length. Don't get me wrong. I believe the reference from 2 Corinthians 10:5 is very relevant. Such is part of our responsibilty as disciples of Christ.

What I am questioning is not the action but rather the methodology we adopt. I am trying to say that we should stick with building on foundation statements made by God on specific matters, such as the question of whether He is one person or three persons in one.

On the Trinity subject let's lay the foundation and get agreement about whether the foundation is solid or not. Then we can start adding “bricks”. A house foundation doesn't get stronger or better by placing bricks on top of it.

Deuteronomy 6:4 is unquestionably a foundation statement made by God to define what He is and is not. A statement made to a people who were fresh out of Egypt. Here God was setting the record about himself straight, once and for all.

It was to be known that He was not in anyway like the God’s in Egypt, where the Children of Israel had been called out from. In contrast to the many Gods in Egypt, He was the only Lord; one Lord. Not many, not a composite God, He alone was God, as stated in Deuteronomy 4:35.

If anything, Deuteronomy 6:4 is the qualification and confirmation of what was stated in Deuteronomy 4:35 which says, “To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD Himself is God; there is none other besides Him”

I referred to Deuteronomy 6:4 in an earlier post as being a single stand alone statement but this was not entirely correct, as I was forgetting about what had already been said in Deuteronomy 4:35. Together, these two statements make a very strong foundation.

Surely this statement, together with Deuteronomy 6:4 flies in the face of the idea that beside God the Father, there is God the Son and God the Holy Spirit? If the trinity understanding is as important as some would have us believe, then the Children of Israel must have been subjected to a grave injustice, as they were given no knowledge of such, so called, essential fact.

When we are done with these two references in Deuteronomy for starters, then perhaps it will be timely and appropriate to add some “bricks” to the under pinning thoughts, once established and agreed upon.

And by all means, let us take up the point made in 2 Corinthains 10:5 and perhaps add with it 2 Timothy 4:1-5, “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 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; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.”

Please say on. Your thoughts are appreciated.

Elidad

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Elidad @ Aug. 23 2006,05:57)

Hi t8, In effect, I think we are virtually on the same wave length. Don't get me wrong. I believe the reference from 2 Corinthians 10:5 is very relevant. Such is part of our responsibilty as disciples of Christ. What I am questioning is not the action but rather the methodology we adopt. I am trying to say that we should stick with building on foundation statements made by God on specific matters, such as the question of whether He is one person or three persons in one. On the Trinity subject let's lay the foundation and get agreement about whether the foundation is solid or not. Then we can start adding “bricks”. A house foundation doesn't get stronger or better by placing bricks on top of it. Deuteronomy 6:4 is unquestionably a foundation statement made by God to define what He is and is not. A statement made to a people who were fresh out of Egypt. Here God was setting the record about himself straight, once and for all.

Thanks Elidad.

I agree with your methodology, but in my opinion it has already been done in the earlier part of this discussion. Once the bricks were placed, certain people turned up and tried to kick down the building and we have been telling them why it is not coming down and why their toes are hurting.

However I do realise that this discussion is huge and that can be missed. But I am not against making the case again. Also, it must be noted that many who come here actually come from the following page where the case is already made:
https://heavennet.net/writings/trinity.htm

To this day, not one Trinitarian has been able to refute with scripture that God is one, and Jesus is his son. The scriptures that have been quoted have remained to this day with not one Trinitarian being able to refute them.

To be honest with you, I actually wanted to close this discussion down when it reached page 100. My thinking was that if they cannot come up with anything solid to show that what was being taught was error, then they never would be able to and the following pages would only be from those kicking against the goads and us replying to their accusations. I also suspected that they would kick from then until the end of the world.

But since this discussion has continued, then perhaps it is a good time to make the case again.

The scripture you quote is a good start.

[Elidad]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 22 2006,08:12)

Elidad,Aug. wrote: However I do realise that this discussion is huge and that can be missed. But I am not against making the case again. Also, it must be noted that many who come here actually come from the following page where the case is already made: https://heavennet.net/writings/trinity.htm

Thanks a lot t8. You have just opened my eyes to something I hadn't realised before. That link you mentioned did the trick.

Here's me been thinking that Heaven Net was basically just a discussion Forum. I hadn't picked up on clicking on 'Heaven Net' as it appears in the top right corner, and exploring that path.

Now that I have been directed to such, I will spend some time reading what is available there to help clear up my ignorance .

Cheers

Elidad

[Proclaimer]

No problem.

It is a priviledge to help.

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Matt 1.20f
“20But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “(A)Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been [a]conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.

21″She will bear a Son; and (B)you shall call His name Jesus, for He Âwill save His people from their sins.”

Lk 1.31f
“31”And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you (A)shall name Him Jesus.

32″He will be great and will be called the Son of (B)the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him Âthe throne of His father David;

33(D)and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, (E)and His kingdom will have no end.”

34Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?”

35The angel answered and said to her, “(F)The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of (G)the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason (H)the holy Child shall be called (I)the Son of God.”

God is the physical Father of Jesus who was conceived in the womb of Mary. But the work of God was through the Holy Spirit.

Trintarians must explain how,
if there are three persons in God,
why they do not trumpet that the Holy Spirit,
and not the Father,
is the father of Jesus Christ.

The answer is that the Holy Spirit
is the Spirit of the Father,
who always does his work through His Spirit on earth.

[camrezaie]

excellent point nick, ive never thought of that my self… im definitely going to use that as one of my arguments…

everyone out there can agree that God's purpose is not for us to believe a mix of truths and lies, and everyone can also agree that you cant believe in a mix of truths and lies and ultimately deem is as being the absolute truth… that would just be foolish and naive, we can probably all agree that if there is the tiniest aspect that is false in something, then the entire thing is false all together…. well here is the TINIEST aspect of the trinity that can is proven false extremely clearly, the trinity says that jesus is all knowing…

Mark 13:32
32 Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father.

lol you cant argue against that…. some of you might say well “jesus was submissive to the father”… ask yourself this question, how does this have anything to do with submission? some of you might say well that was because he was on earth, well where in the bible does it say that jesus knows all in heaven? the problem is people have their minds predetermined that the trinity is correct so they incorporate it in any way possible into the bible, the problem is you have your order of operations wrong, your using the doctrine to pave your beliefs from the bible instead of doing it the other way… enough said :/

[Author]

Posts