Could The Trinity Doctrine Be Wrong?

[Colin norris]

Catholics do not worship Mary.

Catholics do not believe Mary is, or ever was, part of the Trinity.

And there's no evidence whatsoever she was a virgin after having 6 children.

 

[BULLDOG]

Ultimately, what you get out of the bible is justification for what you already decided to believe. No matter what that might be.

 

[JohnDB]

God is infinite in many ways...
His infinite goodness is declared as Holiest part of the holiest portion of the holy...a level of goodness that has a reaction to error the moment it comes into contact.

So an intermediary is needed to go between man and God. Which is why the Old Testament system had priests who had a strict lifestyle laws from parentage to birth and throughout their whole lives and even more strict rules to follow when serving in the Temple...all this just to serve in the "shadow" of God's real Temple in Heaven.

Powerful stuff!

Jesus is God...but someone tangible for our feeble understanding to know and touch and understand. Meaning that Jesus is as much of God as would fit into a human body. (A very small portion If such a thing can be said) but it satisfies the "son/seed" portion of the "Son of God".

And has been observed as we discuss various differences of beliefs surrounding the "Incarnation" it is obvious to me that because God is a person and personable while being infinite and unknowable at the same time we all can have a unique relationship with God. (Within certain confines) as we all are unique persons with unique perspectives. Which unique relationship is a preferred one? The one that is the most childlike of course...the one that doesn't seek to know or define the unknowable but just accepts what is and goes from there.

I don't go beyond what is written...and with scriptures being written in the manner they are full of idiomatic languages and expressions from 2,000 to 5,500 years ago... well the understanding of what we have is up for considerable debate.

 

[HaShev]

lol rubbish. They used a modern calendar back then, before there even was a 'December'? lol that's rich.

So you don't think shared ancient celebration dates can't translate to shared dates on the new calendars because?
Also try Winter's Solstice.
Selectively choosing to try to debunk 1 point out of many is an amateurish attempt at denial.
Furthermore, your own understanding of changed calendars magically goes missing when you as well as the elect given the 101 page prophetic book in the name of Moshiach, don't see the hidden sign given and significance of Sept being the word for seven(Sheva), because it was the Seventh month before the change in the calendar. ;-)

 

[ding]

Ultimately, what you get out of the bible is justification for what you already decided to believe. No matter what that might be.

The goal should always be to get what the authors intended. No matter what that might be.

 

[Thors Provoni]

A Catholic cardinal was sent by the Pope to slap a Bull on the altar of a Greek Orthodox Patriarch to excommunicate him. This began THE GREAT SCHISM - Catholics breaking away from the Orthodox - ending the "one church" that had been for a thousand years.

There is so much ignorance and claims that Catholic was the first church that it makes me sick.

Makes me feel like vomiting.

 

[BULLDOG]

The goal should always be to get what the authors intended. No matter what that might be.

I personally care what the author meant, but in many cases, that is unknown, and undiscoverable. I personally know sweet little grey haired ladies who would shank you and leave you in an alley to die if you tried to tell them they misunderstood a passage in their bible.

 

[ding]

I personally care what the author meant, but in many cases, that is unknown, and undiscoverable. I personally know sweet little grey haired ladies who would shank you and leave you in an alley to die if you tried to tell them they misunderstood a passage in their bible.

I suspect it's how you go about it.

 

[LibertyKid]

The Trinity is a man made, definitive term that tries to define the existence of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
However, the trinity is not didactic in nature nor should it be used to define what is and isn't orthodox since it is never mentioned in scriptures.

 

[DudleySmith]

The Trinity is a man made, definitive term that tries to define the existence of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
However, the trinity is not didactic in nature nor should it be used to define what is and isn't orthodox since it is never mentioned in scriptures.

It's merely aspects of one God, and nothing complex. God sends his avatar, a 'son of man', figuratively, Jesus, to deliver the New Covenant personally; the 'Holy Spirit' is the force that touches those who are saved personally and acts on an individual level throughout the body of believers, just as church is a single entity made up of several or many thousands of beleivers. Simplistic answer but roughly true without posting a book long exegesis on the concept; there are many of those out there already. Pagan materialists are merely just trying to be clever and play semantic games they aren't nearly literate enough to play without looking like the ignorant dumbasses they are; they like to tell Da Evul Xians what they should be saying, but they don't want to actually read the texts themselves and approach the issues from knowledge.. It is considered part of orthodoxy because it appears very early on, and isn't a big mysterious deal.

 

[LibertyKid]

It's merely aspects of one God, and nothing complex. God sends his avatar, a 'son of man', figuratively, Jesus, to deliver the New Covenant personally; the 'Holy Spirit' is the force that touches those who are saved personally and acts on an individual level throughtout the body of believers, just as church is a single entity made up of several or many thousands of beleivers. Simplistic answer but roughly true without posting a book long exegesis on the concept; there are many of those out there already.

Right... Sure. But the relationship between the three was never anything that believers were to wrestle with to this degree. And this is the problem I have with the Trinity. Allow the term to exist as a way to introduce and discuss the relationship, but understanding how or why the relationships exists was never a tenet of salvation.

 

[DudleySmith]

Right... Sure. But the relationship between the three was never anything that believers were to wrestle with to this degree. And this is the problem I have with the Trinity. Allow the term to exist as a way to introduce and discuss the relationship, but understanding how or why the relationships exists was never a tenet of salvation.

I don't disagree; it was just a convenient reference concept, shorthand for the whole body rather than repeatedly listing all three separately all the time, for the same reason people just refer to their church as a whole rather than list every single member by name every time they talk about it. But conspiracy theorists aren't sane and can't ever get beyond their neuroses.

 

[Thors Provoni]

Trinity-bashers SQUEAL LIKE PIGS if anyone even hints at using Johannine Comma to defend Trinity - though nothing is proven other than 1 John 5:7 has many variants.

1Jo 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Tertullian - first to use the term TRINITY - used WORD rather than SON, but he eventually embraced the Montanist heresy.

The PIG-SQUEALERS love it that they can diss 1 John 5:7 - but really nothing is proven.

Act 5:3
But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

Act 5:4
Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

 

[Thors Provoni]

Isa 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus is God. The Holy Ghost is God, as it says in Acts 5.

Know it.
Live it.

 

[justinacolmena]

problem is:
The original trinity was father/mother/son, the church used the mystery religions mother son devotion and idols.
Then it became Father, word, son until it became Father, Holy Spirit, Son.

Just put another trinity on top of that upside down and you've got yourself a bright yellow star of David there, Mister, because you've been watching the Da Vinci Code instead of reading the Bible.
If Mary the mother of Jesus was a Virgin, then that makes Joseph a Saint.

Matthew 23:9 KJV - And call no man your father upon the - Bible Gateway

So neither Joseph nor Mary is God. The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity was derived at by a careful process of eliminating all the alternatives, because Christianity cannot be a papist or popish religion of a Father and Son together — say, in the flesh — if the right Spirit is not present.

 

[surada]

The Moon Goddess?

No, Mary is revered as the mother of Jesus.

 

[surada]

Isa 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus is God. The Holy Ghost is God, as it says in Acts 5.

Know it.
Live it.

That passage is not about Jesus. Isaiah is writing about Ahaz.

 

[surada]

1 problem is:
The original trinity was father/mother/son, the church used the mystery religions mother son devotion and idols.
Then it became Father, word, son until it became Father, Holy Spirit, Son.
The problem with that is when Daniel has his vision, he did not claim to be the messenger giving the message, nor be claimed one with- but a part of that messenger. Nor did any prophet claim or be claimed a duality or trinity they just were Oracles of the message.
Most damaging is Rev 1:13 Jesus is claimed
"like unto" son of man. Like unto: emulation, impersonation of son of man.

problem 2; counting is off
Their early writings say;
"God will give you another with a new name", so thats a 4th portion not 3, and really 5 since they never recognized the the body-face of the first return.

Daniel wasn't written until the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabean Revolt.. around 168 BC.

 

[Thors Provoni]

That passage is not about Jesus. Isaiah is writing about Cyrus the Great.

BwahahhahhahahHAH HAH HAH !!

 

[surada]

BwahahhahhahahHAH HAH HAH !!

Actually, I screwed that up.. Its about Ahaz not Cyrus.

Isaiah doesn't write about Jesus at all.. This is why Christians shouldn't fiddle with scripture. Matthew got it wrong .. perhaps deliberately.