Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:09 AM
 
18,172 posts, read 16,395,091 times
Reputation: 9328

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UtahOrBust994 View Post
By non-trinitarian, I mean those who believe that the Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit are separate beings, and that Jesus Christ was in fact not actually Emanuel (God with us).

As far as I am aware, although I'm sure there are a few others that I can't think of at the moment, this refers to at least Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons.

My question to you is, do you believe that the Trinity as a doctrine is essential for a truly Christian identity, or if you are someone who rejects the trinity, then do you believe that your own understanding of how the members of the Godhead relate to one another is essential, and how does that impact how you view Christians on the other side of the coin?
Non Trinitarians would.

Since the Doctrine of the Trinity is not explicitly taught in Scripture, it cannot be an essential doctrine.

 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:14 AM
 
Location: USA
17,161 posts, read 11,390,383 times
Reputation: 2378
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin View Post
"Trinity" is a coined word. The nearest equivalent 1st century word used is "Deity" (Colossians 2:9)
Just because something is beyond human comprehension does not then negate the truth of such existing as revealed by God.

In short, a non-trinitarian is not Christian for such a person rejects the true God.
No, they reject one particular understanding of God, not God. There's a big difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Deity does not mean trinity...trinity was made up...anyone who believes in the trinity is an isolator worshipping multiple gods...
You realize that people who believe in the trinity actually believe they are worshiping ONE God, right? It doesn't make logical sense, but they are CONVINCED that in some mystical way the three really are ONE. Do you think that their erroneous understanding (according to you) outweighs their intent to worship ONE God?
 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:35 AM
 
Location: arizona ... most of the time
11,825 posts, read 12,491,540 times
Reputation: 1319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
Kind of sucks for the Apostles.
Since the teaching is true founded upon a "precept upon precept" concept, there will be no excuse for the non-trinitarian for their wanton disbelief of the revealed truth.
 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:41 AM
 
Location: arizona ... most of the time
11,825 posts, read 12,491,540 times
Reputation: 1319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo View Post
No, they reject one particular understanding of God, not God. There's a big difference.
Yes it is a big difference because the Deity God is the only one who saves.
Reject that and there is no alternative ending in being damned ... as Jesus said being cursed by God \ condemned already.

That's of course it's no big difference if one bought into the other popular lie of all roads end in the same place after death ... eventually.
 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:45 AM
 
Location: USA
17,161 posts, read 11,390,383 times
Reputation: 2378
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin View Post
Yes it is a big difference because the Deity God is the only one who saves.
Reject that and there is no alternative ending in being damned ... as Jesus said being cursed by God \ condemned already.

That's of course it's no big difference if one bought into the other popular lie of all roads end in the same place after death ... eventually.
There is a big difference between rejecting God and rejecting YOUR understanding of God. They are not one and the same.
 
Old 06-17-2015, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
28,094 posts, read 29,957,386 times
Reputation: 13123
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin View Post
Since the teaching is true founded upon a "precept upon precept" concept, there will be no excuse for the non-trinitarian for their wanton disbelief of the revealed truth.
Would you mind giving God a heads up on that, twin?
 
Old 06-17-2015, 12:17 PM
 
Location: Finland
709 posts, read 377,915 times
Reputation: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by UtahOrBust994 View Post
By non-trinitarian, I mean those who believe that the Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit are separate beings, and that Jesus Christ was in fact not actually Emanuel (God with us).

As far as I am aware, although I'm sure there are a few others that I can't think of at the moment, this refers to at least Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons.

My question to you is, do you believe that the Trinity as a doctrine is essential for a truly Christian identity, or if you are someone who rejects the trinity, then do you believe that your own understanding of how the members of the Godhead relate to one another is essential, and how does that impact how you view Christians on the other side of the coin?
The Lord Joshia's head is God, and the Spirit of truth, is here to teach the doctrines of our Lord.

But if the trinity makes them equal, then the trinity is false doctrine, anyway the whole trinity word is from a man named Tertullian, and he was a early Catholic elder before he separated from there in to some other sect, and after that he based a new sect inside of that sect.

So clearly he wasn't a man which was lead by the Spirit, but still the church has made his a Church Father.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian
 
Old 06-17-2015, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Illinois
124 posts, read 97,865 times
Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
The scriptures don't actually "define" God at all. What they do is tell us about His many qualities and attributes.

I understand that. What I don't understand is why you think that my seeing Him as a physical being means that I'm not every bit as Christian as you are.

When Jesus Christ brought a storm on the waters of the Sea of Galilee to an immediate halt simply by saying, "Be still," did having a physical body in any way impede Him? He could have commanded the waters of the Dead Sea to become fresh instead of salty without even being near them. God's power and influence has nothing whatsoever to do with whether He has a physical form or not, and Jesus Christ's mortality is absolute proof of this.

Also, when Jesus was baptized, His Father's voice was heard from Heaven and the Holy Ghost was seen in the form of a dove. Clearly, the Father was in Heaven, the Son was in the water being baptized, and the Spirit had temporarily taken on the form of a dove and was witnessed on earth. It wasn't the Father who appeared as a dove, was it? Why do you think this was the case?

Mormons worship and glorify God, too -- every bit as much as you do. Jesus Christ told us to address our prayers to "our Father which art in Heaven" and He told us to pray in His name. We follow His instructions exactly. You may consider the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost to each be a "piece of God." We believe that each of them has the same divine attributes and is to be considered "God" when spoken of individually or when spoken of collectively.

So it had been in the works for "at least 90 years prior"? And why do you think it had not been "in the works for 325 years prior"? Why is there not even a single account from Christ's contemporaries speaking of a three-in-one essence?

Oh come on now. That's the most far-fetched statement I've seen in a long time. The reason it was written was that a pagan emperor wanted to eliminate the divisiveness in his empire over a religious matter. He didn't give a damn about which way the vote ultimately ended up going. He just wanted unity. The council was called by a secular authority, not by the pope, who apparently wasn't concerned enough about the situation to call a council about it himself and who didn't even attend. Can you even imagine something like that happening today? Some world leader calls a council of Catholics to decide upon a major Christian doctrine; Pope Francis is absent from the proceedings, which define Christian doctrine for the next 1700+ years.

A class syllabus generally simplified things. It doesn't make them more complicated. If no doctrine was altered, the creeds were unnecessary. The Bible lays out the nature of God and the relationship between the Father and the Son quite adequately on its own. I accept the Bible as God's word. I do not accept the Creeds as God's word. I am a Christian.
Let me address these one at a time.

1. The fact that you see Him as a physical being does not mean that. The fact that you believe that physical body is necessary, and that the Father, Christ, and the Holy Ghost are separate means that we disagree fundamentally about the very nature of God. We cannot BOTH be right about this, and I mean no disrespect whatsoever but I have found no evidence whatsoever in the Bible, the writings of the early Church Fathers and Mothers, or any historical backing to suggest that the Trinity doctrine was an invention of the 4th century, there are passages in the Bible that allude to the trinity, it may not be explicit, but very rarely was Christ himself explicit about anything.

2. Christ didn't have to transcend space and time to calm the waters did he? No? and Christ's mortality is only the proof you are claiming it is, if He was, as I believe he was, the human incarnation of God, in His fullness.

3. I think that God can be manifest on Earth, even in multiple manifestations, and in heaven at the same time. I think to simply dismiss that possibility puts limits on God that are not there. So to answer your question directly, I believe that all three persons were in all three places. Also, Jesus, while fully God, was also fully human, and being fully human was confronted with human weaknesses, such as fear and even doubt, such as He showed while on the cross.

4. If they all have "the same attributes" and are all to be considered God, then why are they viewed as being separate from each other? Why would God waste time teaching Monotheism up until the time of Christ and then suddenly change his tune? God does not speak falsely, He does not purposely lead us astray, and three separate beings that are all "God" and are not one undivided divinity is called polytheism.

5. When Jesus was alive on the Earth much of this hadn't been revealed yet, prior to the crucifixion He hadn't been betrayed, suffered, died, or risen. Post resurrection He still had yet to ascend and return to heaven. Also, even if He had revealed everything, much of what He did reveal was misunderstood by the apostles, over and over again in the gospels he corrects them and chastises them for missing the point. So how many "contemporaries" do you expect to find who understood what the apostles didn't until Pentecost (40 days AFTER the last chance to write a contemporary account)? Even if there had been such accounts how likely is it honestly that their writings would survive the 300 years of persecution to come?

6. No, the church itself did not call that particular council, no the emperor didn't really care about the doctrinal issues that the council was there to clarify, but that is exactly why he didn't meddle in the proceedings, it was a church matter, decided by those within the church who attended, also, issues that came up had been being decided by such councils since the apostles came together for the first one. The council of Jerusalem, was called to make a decision about whether or not non-Jewish converts were bound by the OT law. That one is recorded in the bible itself, check it out in Acts chapter 11. Another fact worth mentioning is that the Bishop of Rome at the time was not the Pope as we know the position today, he was not considered infallible, nor did he have authority over the the other bishops, it was actually almost exactly like the modern Ecumenical Patriarch in the Orthodox Church, more a symbolic title of additional prestige and respect, but no actual additional power, so the lack of his presence at that council doesn't mean anything negative about the council itself, if doesn't mean that it was unimportant or false, not at all.

7. You accept the bible as God's word? Well we agree on that. You don't accept the Creed as God's word? We agree on that too, the difference is that I can see every word in that creed being substantiated and proven true by the Bible

I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. ---> Genesis

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.

Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;
And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;
And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end. ---> The Entire New Testament

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets. ---> the Old Testament and the Epistles

In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.
Amen. ---> Everything from Acts Forward

Last edited by UtahOrBust994; 06-17-2015 at 12:45 PM..
 
Old 06-17-2015, 12:42 PM
 
Location: arizona ... most of the time
11,825 posts, read 12,491,540 times
Reputation: 1319
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin View Post
Since the teaching is true founded upon a "precept upon precept" concept, there will be no excuse for the non-trinitarian for their wanton disbelief of the revealed truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
Would you mind giving God a heads up on that, twin?
Don't need to ... he's revealed it as found in the KJV Bible.

That's why we have mission teams in Salt Lake these next couple of weeks speaking the truth in love to folks just like your self.
 
Old 06-17-2015, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
28,094 posts, read 29,957,386 times
Reputation: 13123
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin View Post
Don't need to ... he's revealed it as found in the KJV Bible.
Sorry, He revealed nothing of the sort.

Quote:
That's why we have mission teams in Salt Lake these next couple of weeks speaking the truth in love to folks just like your self.
So they'll be "speaking the truth in love" pretty much the way you do? Thanks for the advance notice. With that kind of love, who needs hate?

Last edited by Katzpur; 06-17-2015 at 01:18 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top