You Opinions on the Trinity???

That is still three things, or "parts", and very inexact. Some better analogies:

Economism: Triunity in Nature

The most striking analogy is a light source. The burning or glowing object is the source. it is seen in the light it emits, and felt in the heat which is emitted by both the source itself, and also by the generated light. Now this turns out to be practically the exact model of the Godhead. In fact, this analogy is even recognized in scripture, where Jesus is called "the light" (John 1:4-9, 8:12, 12:46, Rev.21:23), and along with the Spirit, proceeds forth from the Father; and the Spirit is sometimes associated with fire (e.g. Luke 3:16, Acts 2:3,4), and is also described in a similar analogy involving wind (John 3:8), and proceeds from both the Father and Son (John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7).

"The Heavens declare the glory of God..."(Psalms 19:1), and for many things [like this] there is a source to which it is 'referenced', or 'identified in/as', a visible manifestation which it is seen in, and a third manifestation, which it is experienced in. So God Himself is identified as the FATHER, (1 Cor.8:6), seen in the SON, (John 14:9, Heb.1:3), and experienced in the HOLY SPIRIT (Romans 5:5, 1 Cor.2:10).
The universe is identified as the physical realm, which is manifest in space, and experienced in time. Space is referenced to a 1st dimension (l=length), seen in two dimensions (l 2=area) and experienced in three dimensions (l 3=volume). Time has its source in the future, is manifest in the present, and was experienced in the past.
Moving on to living beings now, another excellent analogy is what is called the trichotomy, or "triunity of man". Man, made in the image of a plural God (Gen.1:26), is identified in/referenced to his SOUL, seen in his BODY, and in a sense, can be experienced by his SPIRIT. Now the distinction between soul and spirit is pretty fuzzy, and the two are frequently confused, but they are shown to be separate in 1 Thess.5:23 and Heb.4:12. (A good explanation of their difference, which basically is tied up with the emotions associated with them, is given in the appendix.) The soul is shown to be the person's self, basically the invisible person. So your soul is you. The body is also you, representing the person in the physical visible realm. Whereas it can be shown that animals are souls, (Gen.1:20-21, 30; 2:19, 9:4, 10, 12, 15; Lev.11:10, 17:11) they are never shown as having spirits, but it is man's spirit that gives him his understanding (1 Cor.2:11, Job 32:8), setting us apart from the animals, and is the part of us that communicates with God (Rom.8:16). No doubt, God's creating us "in His image" was His adding, breathing into us that third part of us that gave us our intelligence. Body and spirit are in a sense, manifestations of your soul. They are your soul, or person in the sense of being different parts or aspects of it. When something troubles your soul, they trouble you; when your body is hurt, you are hurt; when God 'touches' or 'moves' your spirit, He does those things to you.
Another interesting thing to note is the distinctions of man's constituents. Soul, body, and spirit can communicate with each other! Take, let's say, a temptation to sin. The body ("flesh") says yes, the spirit (conscience convicted by the Holy Spirit) says no, and your mind (soul) is in the middle and has to choose which to obey. If you please the flesh, the spirit will trouble you; if you follow the spirit, the flesh will be displeased. The body receives stimuli from the outside world through the senses, and this is relayed to then back an forth between the soul and spirit through their corresponding emotions, as is discussed in the appendix. Also, they can communicate their own separate messages to the outside. You can say one thing, (whatever comes to your mind), but your body can give a totally different message (e.g. facial expressions, gestures), and once again, it's more fuzzy, but people can often sense what's in a person's heart (spirit), especially by the emotions. Excellent studies of the subject are given in Man On Three Dimensions, by Kenneth Hagin, Rhema Bible Church; and The Spiritual Man, by Watchman Nee, Christian Fellowship Publishers. See also appendix. (Note: A lot of Hagin's teachings are seriously questionable by biblical Christianity, but his treatment of this subject seemed to be good).

http://members.aol.com/etb700/triune.html

 

God did draw a line in the sand on this when he said not to worship false gods, but the one true God and him only. The anti-trinitarians do not have the true God. The bible does teach the Trinity and that is how God has revealed himself. Therefore, teachings against the Trinity are false teachings and do not have the biblical God.

I think you and I have had this discussion before. Oneness Pentecostals do not just have a belief that "Gods triune nature works itself out in a different way than we do." They openly reject and denounce the Trinity. The UPC has statements blasting and denouncing the Trinity. We are not to fellowship with those who reject the biblical God, and this is what Oneness followers clearly do.

 

I'd like to know the answer to that, too.

 

Well said.

I agree that CARM is a horrible place to "get Bible doctrine". I also found CARM to set "new lows" in terms of Christian ethics of the board management - but that is another story.

To your point - it is NOT at all clear that John the baptizer was as "trinitarian" as people are today. You certainly can not tell it from anything he said and it is hard to find a strong Trinitarian statement of belief from the Orthodox Jews of his day.

Neither do you EVER hear any word spoken by the NT apostles such that "The Jews are not saved because they are not trinitarian". The term "Christ" is merely the GREEK form of the HEBREW term "MESSIAH" so the JEWS were in fact CHRISTIANS!

Having said that - I do believe that the Holy Spirit IS the third person of the Godhead AND I think you can make that case from scripture "alone".

But DID the NT authors use it as a TEST for Jews?? We never see them doing that and they had loads of opportunity to do it since the Act 15 JERSUSALEM council SHOWS how closely they were tied to a "Jerusalem-c centric" governing body.

Your point is well thought through Mike. Nice going!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Jesus Christ is Lord God Almighty, Son of God the Father, who was begotten of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary a man on earth, the glorious, heavenly Being 'the Son of Man', who died and rose again from the dead to come again to judge.
Anyone not believing this, cannot claim he is a Christian - or shall perish in hell for so claiming.

 

Bob Ryan, it's a question of worshipping and believing in the right God. The Oneness God is not the God of the Bible, nor is the Oneness Jesus the Jesus of the Bible.

We don't have to find a statement in the Bible saying one must believe in the Trinity to be saved. All we need to know is that the Bible teaches a Trinitarian God, and that God tells us we must worship Him "in spirit and in truth." Well, one is not doing so if one is denying the Trinity or believing in a non-Trinitarian God.

I do think a new believer might not grasp the Trinity well, but as time goes by, that person should be believing in and accepting the Trinitarian God. If that person does not accept it, one would have to wonder if they were really saved.

The true revealed nature of God is an essential of the faith, and to deny it is a heresy.

 

same

Marcia,

And that is who the oneness Pentecostals are worshipping. Who do you think they worshipping? Allah? Are they worshipping the goddess Istar? Are they worshipping Krishna? Are they worshipping the sun? They are not worshipping any of those, or any other false God. They are worshipping God, the creator of heaven and earth. They are worshipping the God of Abraham, Issac, and Joseph. They are worshipping the God who came to earth as Jesus Christ, died for our sins, and rose again the 3rd day

Some of them dont. The Jehovahs Wittnesses surely dont. They deny Christs divinity. THe scriptures tell is anyone who denies the diety of Christ will die in their sins. They are not saved.

Jesus clearly tells us...

Where is the passage of scripture that says...

Or...

You will search in vain for them. They arent there. This "You must acknowledge the Trinity precisely as WE have decided to articulate it" buisiness is a tradition of men.

Let me say again, I AM A TRINITARIAN. I believe it is the best articulation of the Godhead we have. But I will NOT draw a line in the sand against the oneness pentecostals as I do with the JW's because I have clear scripture that authorises me to do that with those who deny the divinity of Christ. We have NO clear scriptures concerning those who believe the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God (in other words,"triune") but they dont believe Gods triune nature works quite the way we do.

I agree with you completly on that.

Some of them are...such as the Jehovahs Witnesses, who deny the divinity of Christ, or the mormons who believe there will be multitudes of Gods.

The oneness pentecostals acknowledge the divinity of the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and that there will eternally be no God but that God.

No...they renounce our understanding and articulation of the nature of God.

Because they disagree with our understanding of the nature of God. They clearly acknowledge the divinity of the Father, the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

Again, who are they worshipping? Istar? The sun god? Allah? Krishna?

I'll ask you again. Where in the scriptures does God say...

God bless,

Mike

 

The irony of that is that under the banner of "orthodox trinitarianism", you have statements such as "three beings" and the now popular "three who's one what", and likening it to three man in unity; yet these are really far worse than modalism, and much more compatible with the notion of false God's (like the Mormon concept) yet are accepted or allowed (at least) by the same people making such harsh judgments, simply because it seems more compatible with the creedal statements.

 

Did Christ condemn John the baptizer, David, Samuel, Daniel, Abraham to hell?

Were they "trinitarian" but just never expressing the point? Was Israel ever known in all of history to be trinitarian?

In Christ,

Bob

 

You have a funny notion of what the true God is. Apparently as long it looks like the biblical God, it's okay. The Oneness God is NOT the God of the Bible because the Oneness God is not God the Father. The Oneness God and Jesus are one and the same to them. This means Jesus was praying to himself on earth. God the Father did not come to earth as Jesus Christ. Is that what you believe? God the Father sent Jesus to earth. Jesus is distinct from God the Father and the HS although all are part of the one Godhead. But the Oneness followers say that Jesus, the HS and God are not distinct. So this means that Jesus was lying every time he said "My Father" (which is quite a bit, look it up) because there is no one for Jesus to say "my Father" about or to in the Oneness view. Do you understand this problem?

Trinitarianism is not just the "best articulation" of the Godhead; it is what scripture teaches. We don't need the word "trinity" in there to say the Bible teaches it. It's the concept that is taught. Since the scriptures clearly teach this, those who deny it are not following the bible.

Of course they acknowledge the divinity of the Father, Jesus and the HS -- because they think they are all the same Person!!! Do you understand that what they believe makes Jesus a liar, as I said above? When Jesus was on earth, there was no Father in heaven, according to them. Do you get the import of this error?

 

OT revelation was not full -- for example, people were saved because they believe in the revealed God. There is no clear teaching on the Trinity in the OT because Christ was only revealed as the coming Messiah, which was not the full revelation we have the NT. They were not told to have faith in Jesus Christ but in God. Look at Heb. 11. Some of the prophets wrote of the Messiah and believed that but they did not even understand fully what that meant. Even the disciples of Jesus did not fully understand Christ's death and resurrection until after it happened.

 

It is possible that when we get to heaven we will then realize that even today - as wise as we think we are - we do not "fully" understand the mission and accomplishments of the Messiah.

 

:type: Coupla' points. I, personally, seldom use the words "the Trinity", but prefer and generally say "the Tri-une God" in that context. Just my own way on this, I guess.

I've seen some of the other "illustrations" attempting to "define" God in this manner. Most have some validity, but also fall somewhat short, as I understand Scripture in my own limited way. Probably the 'best' illustration I personally ever heard (and granted, it falls short, as well) was by a 'Prof' I had in Bible College. He held up his hand holding three pieces of chalk. He said each time. with every possible combination of the three pieces, from one to three, "This is chalk!" That is the best illustration I could come up with, as well.:thumbs:

Ed

 

same

Marcia,
I said...

And you said...

Marcia, none of us, including YOU, can make the claim that we have full, total, and complete understanding of Almighty God. Even with our scriptures, and our good teaching materials, gifted teachers, etc etc etc, we all still....including you...fall woefully short in our understanding of God and His greatness.

I am confident that you would acknowledge that regarding yourself, so why...with your woefully inadequate understanding of God...do you feel the need to judge others as being un-christian simply because they believe Gods triune nature works itself out differently then you do?

I'm not a oneness person so I dont know what their response to that would be, but I would venture that they have a fairly good response.

Why would you think I believe that, when I never said that? Please quote me where I said that. What you DID do is the unethical tactic of adding something...("..the Father..") to what I did say, then try and pin it on me.

What I DID in fact say was that they agree that...

That is what I REALLY said, as apposed to what you tried to make it *appear* that I said they believed.

You again...

I agree.

I agree.

I agree with you. I wish there were a oneness person here to adress that. I acknowledge everything you are saying here. I've said it over and over...I am a trinitarian!

But I am still waiting for you to show me a passage of scripture..(you know, "sola scriptura" as opposed to "tradition"?)..where God tells us that we should use our "trinitarian" view of God to condemn others whos understanding of Gods triune nature works differently then we believe it does.

Scripture please...scripture please!

I am not argueing against your view of the trinity, I am only argueing against the view that we should condemn others based on something that is a tradition, with no scriptural admonition from God, as we have regarding...

1) Denying Christs Diety.

2) Denying justification through faith alone.

3) Failure to believe in Christ.

4) Rejecting the gospel

etc etc etc.

We have solid scriptural justification to warn people of the gravity of those denials. But we have no solid scriptural support for condemnation of people who deny this man made *explanation* of Gods nature that men have called the "trinity". (even though I believe it is an accurate explanation)

I said...

And you said...

And thats their buisiness. I believe they are wrong, but I am not going to codemn them for it with no scriptural justification.

I agree with you, but they believe we are making God a liar with what we believe. They are wrong, but again...thats their buisiness.

They would probably say that both of those *manifestations* of God were in operation at the same time, or something like that. I'm not oneness so I dont know for sure what they would say..


God bless you,

Mike

 

In theory it would be something like that, but in practice, some of them, from what I have heard, actually try to separate the human Jesus from the divine Son. This then becomes identical to the old unitarian position (which openly denied the deity of Christ and claimed the divinity lied in "the Son" which was separate and joined with the human Jesus at his baptism or later, and it even mixed with Orthodox Trinitarianism in the form of a doctrine called "Nestorianism", which also tried to say Jesus was not apart of the Trinity).

So that would be a problem. Still, I would think that modalism (in its "theoretical" form) is still not as bad as pulling the Persons too far apart, which seems to be more tolerated.

 

Mike, I am not claiming to have a "full, total, and complete understanding" of God so don't use that argument. You are making a straw man argument here. But we still have to defend the faith and the true nature of God as taught in Scripture (which you acknowledged it is). We don't have to have a full understanding of God to defend his nature. You do realize, don't you, that this Oneness view of God was around in the 3rd century (called Sabellianism) and declared a heresy? The Trinity was well understood and taught by believers.

I do not have a "woefully inadequate understanding of God" because God has given all of us an adequate understanding of his nature in the Bible. It is not total but it is adequate and it is enough for us to know that denial of the Trinity is a denial of God's revealed nature.

I know their responses and their responses are woefully inadequate (to use your phrase). In fact, we used to have Oneness people on this list and they could never answer the question about Jesus praying to himself or seeing the HS descend on Jesus when he was baptized, at the same as the Father saying, "This is my beloved Son" from heaven.

Well, there were Oneness people here but they are not regarded as Christians by Baptists and so they are gone. In fact, my church does not regard them as Christians nor does any church or ministry I know. They have denied an essential of the faith -- the Trinity - and that puts them in the heresy camp. It's just a fact - has nothing to do with my opinion.

If you are trinitarian, it seems it would bother you that there are people who not only deny the Trinity but attack it and attack the faith of Trinitarians because this is what they do.

I could post every scripture that teaches the Trinity but I don't have time. The Oneness followers deny those scriptures. Isn't that bad enough? You don't need a statement in the Bible to say those that deny the Trinity are in error because, as you well know, the word "Trinity" is not in the Bible. Don't you have an understanding that the nature of God as revealed in scripture is paramount? And to deny that nature is serious error?

And denying the nature of God is as serious as those. That's why this view was condemned as heresy in the 3rd century and still separates Oneness followers today from believers. Check it out. I don't know what your church is, but I bet your pastor would not allow a Oneness pastor to preach there. My pastor wouldn't, nor would any pastor of my supporting churches or other churches I know. They consider the Oneness view to be a heresy and non-Christian.

It is not just their business since they are claiming to be Christians and they outright deny the Trinity. They say, "The Trinity is a lie." It's not just that they don't acknowledge it. They claim to know enough about God to deny it. I am not condemning them; I am condemning, by using the Bible as the Bible tells us to do, their view of God, which is heretical.

We are told to defend the faith in Jude and in other places; we would be remiss and disobedient not to defend attacks on the Trinity. How in the world can we be making God a liar by defending the truth of the revealed God? You apparently are not familiar with the scriptures that tell us to defend the faith and hold to sound doctrine. They are all over the place. See 1 and 2 Timothy, for example.

 

Quoting Marcia,

"We are told to defend the faith in Jude and in other places; we would be remiss and disobedient not to defend attacks on the Trinity. How in the world can we be making God a liar by defending the truth of the revealed God? You apparently are not familiar with the scriptures that tell us to defend the faith and hold to sound doctrine. They are all over the place. See 1 and 2 Timothy, for example."

God stand by you! You lift my heart and spirit, Marcia, thanks!

 

God is The Only One God who revals Himself to man either in saving love or in condemning judgement. The Christian who has some time behind as a Christian, will so get to know this God, as God the Father, Creator of heaven and earth, and Jesus Christ His only begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit. The years as they go by will better and better reveal the revealing God - it would be impossible if He were not Holy Spirit - of Whom we would have know nothing if not saved by the blood and resurrection of the Lamb - Who teaches us everything we could possibly know about God the Father. I think this confession is in full agreement with the Scriptures and experience and sound intelligence.