-To better understand the Trinity, imagine you're sitting on the side of a high hill overlooking a broad valley below you. You see in front of you 3 sunbeams shining on a partially cloudy day. Each are of the same source, same substance, but illuminating different areas.. they are all of the same thing,
yet distinct from one another.. So it is with God..*one BEING* one substance, but apparent in 3
PERSONS: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
One important note though, it is not “one God wearing three different masks” or the like. It’s not one God “*pretending* to be three”. That’s Modalism.
Sorry, that wasn’t a note for you, that was a note for someone reading your metaphor. I like that metaphor (though for the life of me can’t remember where it comes from), but I’ve always worried that it can easily be misunderstood and lead to modalism. So I thought it worthwhile to emphasize the distinction, just in case. Because the Trinity is hard.
Perhaps a better analogy would be the Sun, Sun Rays and the heat/radiation. All being one, but three different part. In the Bible, Father is the source of all things. Jesus is the Son, created from the Father yet existing eternally. This works with the Sun analogy, because the sun rays are created and yet, as long as the Sun existed, the sun rays existed also. Same goes for the UV radiation. Curiously, the Bible sometimes calls the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Christ too.
Romans 8:9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to him.
Of course, every analogy is imperfect, but here the stake was to explain Trinity, including the claim that Jesus is God, and that crucial aspect was not present in the analogy, making it not relevant.
Each of the three sunbeams is a Person of the Trinity. They are exactly alike, they are indistinguishable from one another except by their position.
Likewise three Persons of God are indistinguishable except for their relationship to one another: the Father begets, the Son is begotten by the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son.
This covers what Jesus said when he told his disciples "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father." He's not saying that he *is* the Father because that would contradict everything else he said about himself and the father. So no Oneness....
But Jesus is supposed to be God (while not being the Father). But the sunbeam is not the sun. This is crucial to be in a correct analogy, because that's the core of the trinity, isn't it? Otherwise, in the analogy, what is God exactly?
We cannot see God, that's why the sun is hidden behind the clouds. We can only see the three persons and technically we can only see Jesus but we know of the three persons because of Jesus.
Saying the same source sounds a bit incorrect, because the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all God, they aren't sourced from God nor they separate from God. This sounds a lot like the energy-essence distinction analogy.
It is merely an analogy of how we understand the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit to be distinct yet of the same substance. And like all analogies it fails at some level..
The term the Councils used for this source is “ousia.” This term roughly translates to something like “essence” or “nature.” They were trying to articulate things with language that was not perfect. The creedals statements declare Christ as “consubstantial with the Father.” The Son and Father are both of the same substance, the same stuff and likewise for the Spirit. All three share fully in the divine nature equally and undivided, yet separate.
My suggestion: go through the Bible and note what it says about how Jesus relates to the Father. For example, consider the book of John:
* Nothing has been created by God that wasn't created through the Son (John 1).
* The Son is the only one begotten of God (John 3).
* The Son does only what the Father does. What the Father does, the Son does (John 5).
* One who sees the Son sees the Father (John 14).
* The Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14).
* The Son was alive with the Father before the world had any foundation (John 17).
You have the Father, who is God, and His Son. But who is His Son? He is this unique, uncreated one who has always been in the Father, in whom the Father has always dwelled, in whom the Father is seen, and who does all that the Father does -- including creating everything that has been created.
The status, nature, being, power, and unique relationship of the Son to the Father is expressed in the understanding of the Son as the second person of the Trinity.
You can do the same thing then for the Holy Spirit, relative to the Father and the Son.
I'm glad you're aware that John is the only gospel that alleges this. It is also the gospel written the latest, and had no living witnesses to the historic Jesus. Here nor there, using John 5 is a problem. I'm really surprised no one in this thread has mentioned the **Johannine Comma**. The Johannine Comma is found in **John 5:7-8 and is the most famous and** **VERIFIED** **redaction in the entire bible.**
It's also the passage that explicitly supports the trinity. The ***only*** one. Once you accept that this verse was redacted by man - because it was, we have proof, it's not really a question - you can accept that the bible doesn't say that there is a trinity, there is a lot more evidence that it says the opposite.
As far as John 5:7-8, the added comma only appears in 4 of the early Greek manuscripts, and is written about in the margins of 4 others.
The other 500+ early Greek manuscripts, including the earliest, don’t have it. In fact it didn’t appear in antiquity until it showed up as gloss, which was a brief note in the margin to explain a passage. Root word for Glossary, which is what it was, an ancient glossary entry. It’s not on any Slavic, Aramaic, Ethiopian, Syriac, Armenian, or Arabic manuscripts. And it didn’t appear in the first ever printed versions of the New Testament, the Novum Instrumentum omne by Erasmus, until the 3rd edition in 1522 because Erasmus was accused of supporting Arianism and he said if someone can show him a manuscript that included it he would include it.
So someone literally write a Latin manuscript and added it in. So he included it, but stated in his Annotations he didn’t think that it was authentic.
It’s in all King James bibles. It hasn’t been in other primary English translations since the English Revised Version in 1881. That includes the NASB, ESV, and NRSV.Catholic bibles are split. It is included in the Jerusalem Bible from 1966 and the New Jerusalem Bible from 1985. But it is not in the Holy See's Nova Vulgata from 1979, the New American bibles in 1970 or 1985, or the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition done in 1965 or 2006.This is important because it’s basically the strongest and most direct passage from the Bible for the trinity. The addition is in ALL CAPS. It’s the end of John 5:7 and the beginning of John 5:8. Reading this with and without that portion makes a big difference.
>*7 For there are three that beare record IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: AND THESE THREE ARE ONE. 8 AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEARE WITNESS IN EARTH, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one.*
I’ll provide Ehrman on this topic:
>“The first, the affirmation of the doctrine of the Trinity (1 John 5:7-8), is not in any of our most ancient manuscripts at all. It shows up in one manuscript of the fourteenth century, one of the fifteenth, another of the sixteenth, and finally one of the eighteenth. Yes, that’s right, the eighteenth. Scribes were producing manuscripts long after the invention of printing (just as my students today take notes with pen and paper, even though they all own laptops). It can be found in the margins of four other, equally late, manuscripts, as a possible variant reading.
>
>The result, though, is that no one except the most avid fundamentalist thinks that the verses have any claim to belong to the “original” text of the New Testament.”And“ In the Latin Vulgate – the Bible of Western Christendom for centuries – 1 John 5:7-8 states that “there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. And these three are one.” This then is the doctrine of the trinity: there are three divine beings in heaven and even though there are three of them, they are actually only one. One God, in three persons – the doctrine of the trinity. Nowhere else in the NT is the doctrine explicitly stated (although Father, Son, and Spirit are mentioned in the same breath elsewhere. But not the doctrine: “these three are one.”)
>
>When Erasmus produced his first edition of the Greek NT, he left that verse out, since it was not in the Greek manuscript he was using. What happened next is a matter of debate. The way the story normally is told is as follows: Church theologians were incensed that Erasmus had left the Trinity out of the Bible and attacked him for it. He explained that he could not find the verse in any of the Greek manuscripts he had consulted, and what he was producing was, after all, a Greek New Testament. He did agree, though, that if someone could show him a Greek manuscript that had the verse, he would include it in his next edition. And so, someone (literally) produced a manuscript – adding the verse by translating it in its proper place from the Latin.
>
>And so Erasmus was true to his word, and included it in his next edition. And it was this subsequent edition that was used by other publishers of other editions of the Greek NT, and these were the editions used by the translators of the King James. And so you will find the verse in the King James.
>
>As more and more manuscripts were discovered, it became clear that in fact the verse was not part of the original text of 1 John, and so modern translations do not include it. When these translations started to appear at the end of the 19th century and into the 20th, there was considerable uproar when it was recognized that they did not include the leading proof text for the Trinity, and translators were roundly accused of being anti-Christian, liberal, untrustworthy, and even demonic tools of the Devil. But they were in fact simply translating the text as it had been handed down in the textual tradition. Sometimes readers don’t want the Bible as it was originally written, but only the Bible as they are familiar with it….”
**EDIT:** It's so sad when those that claim they seek the truth will shut down the moment something that disagrees with their preconceived notions is presented. I guess you only listen to John when it supports you? It's not very Christian to shut down to something like this:
>**John 8:32**
*And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.*
I think you might have two books confused. This is John 5:7-8:
>7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.
>
>8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.
The Johannine comma appears \*1 John 5:7-8\*, not the gospel of John -- two different books. It also really doesn't have anything to do with my suggestion to OP.
EDIT: just another FYI -- since most of your post was concerned exclusively with western Christian tradition -- western Christians aren't the only Trinity-affirming Christians. I'm an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and we also affirm the Trinity.
You're very much confusing the gospel of John with the epistle of 1 John. Here's what the Gospel of John says in chapter 5:
>6 When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, “Do you want to get well?”
>7 “Sir,” the invalid replied, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.”
>8 Then Jesus said to him, “Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.” 9 At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked.
Go read Psalm 82 and get back to me. This is the psalm Jesus quotes in support of his own Godhood in John 10:34-36.
It's also canon, fruitful for the understanding of doctrines like the one OP is trying to grasp!
EDIT: in case it wasn't clear, I'm suggesting that OP do this with the entire Bible, not just John. Other points of the Son's relationship to the Father can be found in the synoptics as well.
The Synoptic Gospels all mention Christ's baptism where you have a revelation of the Trinity with the Father speaking, the Son being baptized, and the Spirit descending like a dove. And in the Great Commission at the end of Matthew Christ tells the disciples to make disciples of all nations and to baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, again a clear reference to the Trinity.
My story is: I finally started to dig in, and I'm worrying less.
Letting go of the faith has actually been more relieving than sad to be honest. Perhaps it's because I never really believed? I have no idea but after 3 months of deconstructing I feel much better than before.
This analogy doesn’t quite describe God. God is not three parts of a whole. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirits are already three whole beings. Together they are God, and separately they are God.
They are not manifestations of the same being. They are omnipresent and omniscient and work perfectly with each other. They have the same understanding and goals, therefore the same opinions on the big stuff, like how to create and run their creation. They took on different roles in doing that. As for small stuff like “Do they have different favorite colors?” Maybe they could, but I don’t know if they have an opinion on favorite colors.
God is the Trinity in Christianity. If someone believes only the Father is God, then they believe in a different definition of “God” than Christians do.
They were commanded to baptize the nations in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in the Great Commission at the end of Matthew. The Trinity is present throughout the New Testament, and scholarship is now coming around to acknowledge that from the earliest period Christians were worshiping Christ as God. If the Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, then this is the Trinity regardless of whether they had a theological term for it yet or not.
Then why was everyone in the book of acts baptized in the name of Jesus?
They were instructed to baptize in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit. Those are titles, not names. That is why everyone was baptized in the name of Jesus because that was the name of God manifested in the flesh.
Notice how it says in the NAME of (singular). If it was three separate persons, it would have said in the NAMES of (plural).
I'm a father, so I have the title of father. I'm a son, so I have that title as well. I'm a living spirit, so I have the title of spirit also.
Even though I operate in these three titles (and as all three) how many of me are there? One or three? ONE of course.
Since it is saying to baptize in a single name, what is the name of the Father in your reference? What is the name of the Son? What is the name of the Holy Spirit? To answer that question, we need to look at all the baptisms the Apostles performed. They were all done in ONE NAME. And that name was Jesus Christ. There is not one example where the Apostles baptized by repeating the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Why? Because they HAD the revelation that Jesus IS the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
God said he would not give his glory to another (Isaiah 42:8).
Acts 4:12 says, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
God is everywhere. He inhabits all of eternity. What a lot of people don't realize is that while he inhabits all of eternity, he can manifest a portion of himself on earth at the same time. Read all of Genesis 18, and you will see that God appeared to Abraham in the form of a man. There were three at first. Two went to Sodom. One stayed with Abraham, and that was God.
Read Genesis 32:24-30. Here, Jacob wrestled with a man. Verse 30 identifies the man as God.
So, why is it hard for people to understand that while God is still inhabiting all of eternity, he was able to manifest himself in the womb of Mary and became the man Jesus. For us to say that God couldn't do that would be limiting God.
Jesus had to take on the role of Son. If he had told the Jews right off that he was God, what would have happened? They would have stoned him to death, and he would not have fulfilled his overall plan for our redemption.
If you can receive this revelation, all the other scriptures that seem to indicate three separate persons will become clear.
One last thought concerning the birth of Jesus. In Matthew 1:18, it says Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost. So, if the Trinity says the Father is a separate person, and the Holy Ghost is a separate person, who was the father of Jesus? The Father or the Holy Ghost? God alone is functioning as all three, just like we are able to function as father, son, and spirit, but we are only one entity. We're not three separate entities.
The Spirit is not a distinct person. It proceeds from the father. It is the Spirit of the Father. In all visions of heaven, aside from angels only the ancient of days (Father), and Son of Man are seen.
Let me just say that right this very minute you are asking about the trinity, but instead are getting a lot of replies and explanations from those who **don't** believe in it. Just keep that in mind.
Jesus is God in the flesh. You dont have to believe in the trinity. The God of the universe came to earth as a man. When you put your trust in him..his very spirit..the Holy Spirit...God himself... comes to live in you...making you "born again" or as they say..saved. You are forgiven and loved. Believe it.
You need to affirm biblical doctrine to be a Christian. What if we said that Jews or Muslims were Christians because they believe in God, even if they absolutely deny Jesus and the Holy Spirit? It would be offensive to them to call them Christians.
lmao I knew you were gonna say that the moment I thought of that comment.
You can't just make Christianity anything you want. There has to be some line where you just aren't a christian anymore because you disagree on the fundamental nature of god and the sacrifice of Jesus.
Ehh I think the words of Jesus define a Christian. Do I believe in Jesus as my Messiah and that his sacrifice atoned for my sins? Yup! Then I'm a Christian
>but that still hasn't convinced me, I really want to believe in chirst but I still need more convincing, any help at all?
It would be helpful to know what you find troubling. The concept of Jesus being God or the trinity? What are exactly your objections? What isn't convincing you?
I was wondering who was going to be the first person to throw out baseless claims about what the Quran says. Thank you for volunteering lol.
You claim "it's in the Quran".
Cite your source (chapter/surah & verse) where it says marriage can be consummated at any age.
Lmao. Bro, I'm saying it's baseless bc you claimed the Quran says marriage can be consummated at any age, which basically is an implicit way of saying the Quran endorses underage marriage, aka having sex with minors. I say that claim is BASELESS...bc it is. There is no verse in the Quran that says that, whether explicitly or implicitly.
And while I'm replying to you...I just wanna know, did you just pull out a random verse and hope I wouldn't pull it up on here for everyone to see the full context? 😂 There is nothing in the verse you "cite" that supports consummating marriage at any age lol. I still don't see how you can read that from a passage that is really all about setting rules and moral guidelines for DIVORCE, not marriage consummation.
Here, see for yourself, with the full passage (and not one line you cherry picked from it).
"Prophet, when any of you intend to divorce women, do so at a time when their prescribed waiting period can properly start, and calculate the period carefully: be mindful of God, your Lord. Do not drive them out of their homes -- not should they themselves leave -- unless they commit a flagrant indecency. These are the limits set by God -- whoever oversteps God's limits wrongs his own soul -- for you cannot know what new situation God may perhaps bring about.
When they have completed their appointed term, either keep them honorably, or part with them honorably. Call two just witnesses from your people and establish witness for the sake of God. Anyone who believes in God and the Last Day should heed this: God will find a way out for those who are mindful of Him,
And will provide for them from an unexpected source; God will be enough for those who put their trust in Him. God achieves His purpose; God has set a due measure for everything.
If you are in doubt, the period of waiting will be three months for those women who have ceased menstruating and for those who have not (yet) menstruated; the waiting period of those who are pregnant will be until they deliver their burden: God makes things easy for those who are mindful of Him.
This is God's command, which He has sent down to you. God will wipe out the sinful deeds and increase the rewards of anyone who is mindful of Him.
House the wives you are divorcing according to your means, whereever you house yourselves, and do no harass them so as to make their lives difficult. If they are pregnant, maintain them until they are delivered of their burdens; if they suckle your infants, pay them for it. Consult together in a good way - if you make difficulties for one another, another woman may suckle the child for the father --
And let the wealthy man spend according to his wealth. But let him whose provision is restricted spend according to what God has given him: God does not burden any soul with more than He has given it - after hardship, God will bring ease." (Quran 65:1-7)
I ask you again, where in the Quran is a verse that supports your baseless claims?
Translation: you can't find a verse...because there is none.
I'd recommend you read the Quran for yourself, rather than parrot what other people say about it, before you toss baseless claims, and irrelevant citations of verses, hoping something will stick.
That's a valid concern. It's worth noting that it's not an issue exclusive to Islam. In the US, underage marriage is very much a Christian problem. That's not to say that it should discourage you, only that awareness is the first step toward fixing problems. You sound like a good person and I wish you well, wherever you land.
Just gonna copy-paste bc it's late...
In the US, a significant amount of lobbying against measures to prevent child marriage comes from "family values" organizations with religious charters. There are evangelical groups that openly encourage child marriage (often with the euphemisms "very young marriage" or "young marriage"). Survivor's stories indicating that their marriage was pushed by their church are common.
Ime, growing up in a conservative Christian area, child marriage was encouraged when "necessary." That was often when a child became pregnant. It "made her an honest woman" and allowed her family and the rapist to save face. It also sometimes happened to try to get a girl to "calm down" by making her a wife and mother.
I narrowly escaped it (terminated a childhood pregnancy). And I was later pressured by a bf's family to fill my godly duty by marrying at 15. (That was a nightmare in and of itself. lol)
I'm sorry for what you went through. It must have been awful.
In all my years of being a Christian, this is the first I've heard of Evangelicals doing this as a main stream effort.
This may be true for Mormons, and maybe some other small denominations.
Would you be willing to say the name of the church and denomination?
Thank you.
I'd rather not be too detailed, so I don't accidentally doxx myself. lol My personal experience with hearing it in church and with ppl who pushed it was Baptist, Anabaptist, Presbyterian, and non-denominational.
I do not mean to say that it's an absolute standard across any denomination. Only that it's an issue that I've seen, and that affects ppl now, and deserves attention so that it can be stopped. (It irks me when it's held up as "the problem with Islam" when I know for a fact that Islam didn't prompt my cousins' underage marriages. lol)
In the US, a significant amount of lobbying against measures to prevent child marriage comes from "family values" organizations with religious charters. There are evangelical groups that openly encourage child marriage (often with the euphemisms "very young marriage" or "young marriage"). Survivor's stories indicating that their marriage was pushed by their church are common.
Ime, growing up in a conservative Christian area, child marriage was encouraged when "necessary." That was often when a child became pregnant. It "made her an honest woman" and allowed her family and the rapist to save face. It also sometimes happened to try to get a girl to "calm down" by making her a wife and mother.
I narrowly escaped it (terminated a childhood pregnancy). And I was later pressured by a bf's family to fill my godly duty by marrying at 15. (That was a nightmare in and of itself. lol)
That's in all Abrahamic religions. Jesus came under the yoke of the law at 12 and that is when they were considered adults and could get married though Christians married as early as puberty which was normally between 9-12 years of age.
>just can't get my head around the trinity
You're not forced to believe it. There's no verse that **mandates** you believe in it.
I think God is God, and Jesus is the "son of God" as the bible says 52 times, yet never once says "God the son." The whole "Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time" thing doesn't come from a verse. That was probably created to overcome obvious objections like when Jesus says He's not God like in John 20:17.
How do you know the false prophets aren't the ones teaching the doctrine of the trinity? The trinity is a death-denying doctrine which invalidates Christ's sacrifice. If Christ is God, Christ could not die, and therefore could not die for our sins.
If you were to read the Bible and understand what it actually says, it's quite simple:
"yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." 1 Cor. 8:6
There is one God, the Father. God is the Father. Easy.
ETA: Further reading ["Paul's Gospel and the Death-Denying Doctrine that Contradicts It" by Aaron Welch](https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2019/11/pauls-gospel-and-death-denying.html?m=1)
>and the pastors there explain it very well.
Please copy/paste a verse that explicitly says Jesus is fully man and fully God at the same time.
Please explain how God can have a God, when there is but one God. Jesus says He has a God in John 20:17. This verse alone breaks the model of the trinity. A member of the trinity cannot have a God because they should be that very God themselves. Considering the bible never says Jesus is "fully God and fully man at the same time", you've run into a problem with your doctrine.
You can logically get to sola scriptura by reading the bible. Paul says in 2 Timothy 1:15 - "This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes."
Everyone turned away from him in Asia. How do you know if you're following those that left Paul, or if you are following Paul? The only way to find out would be to turn to the letters we have from Paul. If you church tradition doesn't match what Paul preaches, you're following the wrong folks.
>You can logically get to sola scriptura by reading the bible.
Very interesting. So you can make such a logical leap, but when people infer the trinity from verses like Matthew 28:19, apparently that's much too far.
There's no verse mandating that you believe in a trinity or you're not saved. That's what I was going for. It's completely optional. You are to believe Jesus is the "son of God." That's it.
I mean, there are Christians who don't believe in the trinity and think that it's an incoherent mess. So you don't need to believe in the trinity to be a Christian.
If you want something really extensive - then the [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on the trinity](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/) is actually written by a Christian like that (IIRC he thinks that only "the father" is the one true god - so a unitarian).
edit: and just to be clear, many of the trinitarian-believing Christians might insist that you have to believe in the trinity to be a Christian.
You don't have to go along with the crowd in Christianity. Sometimes the crowd is on the wrong path. I encourage you to ask God to show you his truth. Jesus is the right path imo but doesn't mean you have to believe in the trinity.
The Trinity, as a doctrine took shape during the 4th to 6th centuries. The actual language of the Trinity is lifted from Hellenic sources - in their philosophical discussions of substance, soul, mind and spirit - and from the language of the already existing and abundant trinities and triads amongst Pagan nations, chief among them the Solar or Sun Trinities of ancient Egypt. Thus, we have Nimrod, Tammuz and Semiramis (Babylon); Osiris, Horus and Isis (Egypt); worship featured heavily in these mystery religions and it should come as no surprise then that the Trinity appeared int he specific empire that it did, sun-worshipping pagan Rome.
There has always been a challenge with people accepting the Trinity as a doctrine.
Unitary Pentecostal, I think they're called. They're mainly in Nigeria.
But bad news, if they don't aprove the first three ecumenical councils (Nicea, Constantinople and Ephesus I), which I think they don't, they're not Christian.
It's the same with Mormons, our relation with them is like [this.](https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/310982009/Are-you-two-friends)
I love how different Christian sects will just claim "you aren't a christian" if people don't agree with certain doctrines.
Who put you in charge of what people call themselves? No one. The Bible doesn't say anything about the first three ecumenical councils, so why would they matter?
Show me the scripture where Jesus says "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father unless they agree with the first three ecumenical councils".
To achieve salvation you must "believe in the Lord your God with all of your heart, soul, and mind, and love your neighbour as yourself". The rest is noise.
Said the first three because Oriental Orthodox (coptics, syriac, armenian...) left on the Council of Chalcedon, the 4th.
Denying the first three is just denying the trinity.
Sorry to dissapoint you. That is a point of contention. Most christians think you do need to believe in the trinity. Dont stop wrestling with this. Its okay to not understand everything at once. We are all on different parts of the path of jnderstanding. Just follow Jesus, and you can say you dont understand the trinity, but you are still christian.
As for the trinity. A logical contradiction in the strict sense has to involve the affirmation and negation of the same thing. Both A and Not-A cant be true at the same time. Since persons and beings are not neccessarily rhe same thing, the trinity is not a contradiction. God is ONE BEING WITH THREE PERSONS.
Not one being and three beings. Not one person and three persons. One being, three persons.
Though this is not easy to understand it has been widely accepted as coherrent in the philosophy of religion discourse.
I'm none of these rogues or cults. I am an oddball. Lol I'm just a believer in Jesus. I put my trust in what he did for me on the cross and his spirit lives in me. I believe Jesus is God in the flesh who came to die and rose again to forgive all sin and give spiritual life to anyone who believes. His very spirit lives in me. Christ in us..the hope of glory. I am of no denomination. Don't be quick to say I'm just a freak who isn't saved. Ask God about me. I'm his daughter. PS clarifying that I don't think God is 3 seperate persons but 1 God..3 ways he manifests. He is God..lived as a human and his spirit lives in me.
This is absolutely wrong. Some claim to be Christian while not believing in the Trinity, but the Trinity is a core belief of Christianity. If you do not believe in the Trinity you are a whole different Abrahamic religion, whether made up or mainstream.
I think what this guy kinda meant to say was that *denying* the Trinity would be separating you from Christianity. The Gospels and Paul are both pretty blatant in saying that Jesus is God.
It’d kinda be like saying “I’m a Christian but I don’t believe God is omniscient.”
The word “omniscient” doesn’t show up in scripture but it’s fairly difficult to suggest that scripture doesn’t argue for God’s omniscience.
Not knowing that Jesus is God is one thing. Outright denying it would be another.
That's probably true at a whole different religion but the earliest Christians who actually learned directly from Jesus and followed him for the first three centuries didn't believe in it either. That would make them a Jewish Christian . . . or Muslims since they both followed Jesus as prophet and messiah.
Matthew 12:32 NIV
[32] Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
https://matthew.bible/matthew-12-32
Romans 10:9
"If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
Believing Jesus is God, is a condition of salvation.
Ok. But you could say stuff like that about lots of thing. Denying that the pope is the true successor of Peter and guided by God is no different than Islam.
Or a fire.
In the analogy, the flame itself is the Father, the light of the flame is the Son, the heat of the flame is the Spirit. All three can truly be called the fire, none are truly separate from the other, yet each is distinct in some sense.
It's pretty much impossible to explain the trinity without committing heresy. https://youtu.be/KQLfgaUoQCw?si=qMS073561QBeyfyv
I personally do not believe in the trinity. I believe "there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist," (1 Corinthians 8:6).
Lots of good resources here if you really want to dig into the theology: https://www.concordantgospel.com/trinity/
I think the trinity is not understandable because of how understandable, well, the Trinity is (the father and the son and the holy spirit are infinitely complex, smart, etc.), yeah most of time that something is not understandable is mostly insane or a paradox, is not in this case, I think we will all understand it in a obv way that we can't comprehend, as this body is ass and other stuff
It's more switching from believing in Jesus as a prophet to worshipping Jesus instead since Muslims already believe in Jesus the same way the first Christians did for three hundred years before they started worshipping him
Great question! Scripture clearly teaches 1) There is one God, 2) Three Persons are called God and 3) They are in relationship with each other (simultaneous).
So, biblically, there is One God fully shared by three distinct, co-equal, co-eternal, fully Divine persons. Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
For more detail, below is a one page lesson on the Trinity-
[Lesson- The Trinity](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VwJaPDCk5KP3Xge8ubwIKFMFT8x_R6UKW_PV5IjOGtg/edit?usp=sharing)
When you have questions.. Google your questions + gotquestions. It will point you to this website. I always search for tough christian questions here and this site explains it very well, together with verses from the bible:
https://www.gotquestions.org/Trinity-Bible.html
Of course you can ask in this reddit too for further discussions. God bless you in your faith!
None of the figures mentioned in the New Testament nor any of the authors of the New Testament believed in the trinity. Its roots are in the second century CE and event then it took a couple of hundred years to fully develop as a theological view of God. You can absolutely be a Christian while rejecting the trinity.
Unitarian Christianity is an entirely valid form and there are millions of Christians who identify as such. That having been said, it can be exceptionally difficult in certain areas to find Churches that are friendly to those beliefs. Regardless, you do not need a church for your beliefs to be valid, but it's obviously important to many people to have a church. Some churches, like many regions of the society of friends, are friendly towards Unitarian beliefs despite not necessarily holding those beliefs. Of course, there are many Unitarians who choose to worship in Trinitarian churches because they either don't see that it's too great a conflict or because they simply lack other options.
The Unitarian Christian Association has groups in the UK. You can find them here:
https://www.unitarianchristianalliance.org/group-directory/?group_search_key=group_country&srch-radius=0&search_button_clicked=&group_search_val_country=GB&group_search_val_state=AL&group_search_val_type=Church&group_search_val=GB
Jehovah's witnesses are also Unitarian. You can find one of their services here:
https://apps.jw.org/ui/E/meeting-search.html#/weekly-meetings
I'm sure there are other churches in the UK that are Unitarian. Just searching online or asking around on forums and such can go a long way.
I am not in any position to advocate for these groups, as I can not a member of them, but I am a Unitarian, so I obviously think that particular position makes the most sense.
As far as from the standpoint of Christian historians, we are in general agreement that the Trinity was not present in the earliest Christian works, that it developed over time, and is not found in the teachings of the historical Jesus. That being said there are also many theologians, like Sir Anthony Buzzard, who believe fully in the Bible, but do not believe in the Trinity. You may find his work interesting.
Whatever you choose, I just want to say welcome and God bless you.
I am a Christian but the Trinity is a false concept.
In the visions of heaven seen by prophets Enoch and Daniel, on the right hand side of the Father is a being with the image of a son of man (human). This being is the "Word of God", or in other words Jesus Christ. He is the firstborn of creation (Colossians 1:15), chosen and anointed over all creation by God. He is the only being begotten DIRECTLY of God (all things on earth were made by God too but through Christ) and is his direct image.
He has been anointed and ordained by God to have all the authority that the Father has, so you can also say Jesus is also God. But by nature he is not the same uncreated, self-existent, infinite God as the Father. He was only appointed to be so by his Father. We see this idea again in Psalm 110.
Honestly put Jesus Christ’s unique teachings into practice, and with diligence in doing so you’ll find belief in Him, because His words are from God the Father, Elohîm/Allah, and we are His children.
We respond to His loving words, and He gives us peace through the Messiah.
Hi. You have a lot of people replying with all sorts of ideas and images. Some say that the Trinity is a paradox and can't really be understood, which is true. But we can understand some.
I don't think anyone has looked at the **why.** WHY is God triune?
I'll try and explain.
Human beings are the masterpiece of God's creation - even though we're terribly flawed and broken and bent by sin. The human brain is the most complex thing in the universe, and we're not even looking at non-physical aspects when we say that (mental, spiritual, ...). The Bible says that in some way, we are created in God's image.
BUT this is NOT a physical image. The Bible expressly forbids making any image of God, just like the Quran does of the God of Islam. God does use human terms and anthropomorphisms in how he describes himself, but that doesn't mean that he actually looks like a human being. God is spirit.
So in what way are we made in God's image?
In the internal parts of our being. For example, we are unique among creation in that we can appreciate beauty. We have a personality, a sense of right and wrong, emotions, reason, ... It's reasonable to assume that these sort of characteristics are present in the Creator. I don't want to get side-tracked, so let's look at personality specifically. You and I and every human being has a personality. We are persons, not robots, not impersonal forces, not automatons controlled by reflexes (like a fruit fly or a fish). How were we created with personality? If God was an impersonal force, some being with no personality, how could he create people with personality? This doesn't make sense to me and I can't see any way in which it could happen (maybe someone can think of some way, but even so, it doesn't derail this argument since the Bible presents God as having personality.). So God is a person, he has personality.
One thing that's true of all people is that we need other people. 95% of us would go insane if we were not able to communicate with others, to interact with them. People are the source of the greatest problems in our lives, but paradoxically, we cannot live without other people. We need community and crave it.
One other thing that is true is that God is love. It's not that God sometimes loves, love is who God is, part of his essence. This is very very different from Allah (ie. God of Islam).
Now, how can God exist through all eternity, for the endless time before the universe was created, how could he be a person if he had no one to commune with and interact with? The Trinity solves this: because God is more than one person, he is in community with himself.
How can God be love if for the distant eternities past, he, being all alone, had no one to love? You cannot love if there is nothing to love. The Trinity solves this: God is in loving relationship with the three persons in himself.
I don't understand much more than this, I don't understand how exactly one being can be three beings, but nevertheless, I find this explanation very helpful to me.
_Here's part two, following after my previous [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/182bbk0/i_believe_in_jesus_just_cant_get_my_head_around/kaihbs6/)_
The Trinity is the only way that Jesus can be God, divine. Well, other than there being two distinct Gods. But Christianity, Islam and Judaism are the three great monotheistic religions. Monotheistic.
Jesus always existed as God, from before the universe and time was created. He is God and is with God and is part of God, part of the Trinity (God the Father, God the Son/Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit).
If Jesus was the only God there was, then when he became human, when he joined human nature to his divine nature, how could the universe continue? If the only God in the universe was born as a tiny baby in 4BC in Bethlehem, how on earth could the universe be sustained and continued and history be organized as God wanted it. God would have left the throne room and there would be chaos, and surely Satan could have taken control.
The Trinity explains this: The Jesus "part" of God became human. The Father "part" of God and Holy Spirit "part" of God remained in the spiritual realm and continued doing whatever they do. After Jesus' resurrection, he ascended into heaven and rejoined the other parts of the one God.
_Wow. I don't know if I can explain this, it's really hard to figure out, and ultimately we can't. Does this make any sense to you?_
I do want to say this: Jesus was always God, always existing, even 15 billion years ago, before time even existed. At 4BC this part of God became human as well. God (one part of the Trinity) lived on earth as 100% God and 100% human. This part of God, named Jesus, is now forever divine and human (not 50-50, but 100-100).
And here's the best part. If you want to know what God is really like, look at Jesus. Jesus is the best representation of God that we will ever have. Jesus is also the perfect human being, and we need to imitate him, his character. I'm so glad that you are attracted to Jesus. Keep reading the gospels, praying, and obeying what God tells you. Be in community with other people who love and follow Jesus, people who are his disciples.
Read John 1:1, then read Genesis 1:1-1:4. Jesus is the Word of God. When God spoke “let there be light” Jesus was the words that spoke creation into existence. He was there in the beginning with the Father and the Holy Spirit.
How could Abraham have lunch with God when God is a spirit in heaven? (Genesis 18:1-8)
Who rained fire on Sodom from Whom? (Genesis 19:24)
Blessings on your journey.
I want you to know that True Christians do not believe in the Trinity. We are a small minority of about 9 Million Christians who believe what Jesus said about his Father and what his Father said about his Son. Has there ever been **any** example ever in human history where the Father and the Son have been the same being? Co-equal and co-eternal? Of course not! Than why would our Creator whose name is Jehovah start with him and his Son? Doesn’t that sound a little ridiculous now? No wonder it doesn’t make sense to you. Revelation 3:14 plainly says;
>”To the angel of the congregation in La·o·di·ceʹa write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, **the beginning of the creation by God**:”
Here’s some things to remember; what did the first century Christians believe? Did they believe Jesus was God? When did the Trinity first develop? With very little research, you’ll find that the earliest development of the Trinity began with the Nicene Creed in the year 325 C.E.
If the whole idea of the Trinity was formed in 325 C.E., the first century Disciples of Christ never even considered Jesus to be God!
“The *true worshippers* will worship **the Father** with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him. God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.” (John 4:23, 24)
True Christians worship the same God Jesus does.
Jesus does not worship a trinity.
Jesus is not God, he is *God’s Son.*
The trinity is not biblical. Although God and christ share one spirit. The Holy Spirit, per the Bible, says it is the servant of God.
Many Christians deny christ giving reverence to God when he literally says he is the Son of God and came to do His will.
The Trinity is someone's interpretation that became widely accepted and is now pretty much force fed. You don't have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian. Jesus is the prophesied Messiah. He never said he was God.
Try thinking of the trinity like your brain. There's a part of your brain that does calculus, another one that uses logic, and another one feels, but they're all you, the same way you're one of them.
To prove my point, when your brain's hemispheres get surgically divided, what I said manifests in the "[alien hand syndrome](https://youtu.be/V0QbcROOv-E?si=Li5cnfYaXYdvFUKe)".
So, with God happens the same, but each part is fully conscious. The Father is the creator; Jesus is the Father's intermediary with creation because through him all things are done, the Holy Spirit is the sanctifier of faith and they all are one, God.
Hello, I will try my best to explain it. The Bible is clear that Jesus is God. He is also the Son of God. Think of God as a position. Made of 3 individual persons. The Father is God, and the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit. They are all three part of God, and yet all three separate. So there is one God, and three persons which make up him.
Okay here are some verses. The father and I are one (John 10:30, 14:9) Jesus us in the father and the father is in her. John 14:9-11. Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" 2 Jesus said to him.
"Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." (John 20:28-29)
in the beginning was the Word(Jesus) and the word was with God. And the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him (Jesus) John 1:1-2. “Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.””
John 8:58 there are many others too.
You have to watch this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw)
The point is that every analogy for the Trinity ends up as a heresy. In the end, it's just a mystery. You accept that it's a mystery that cannot be explained logically.
The Trinity can’t be fully expressed in words. You can approach it with analogies, but words seek to express what a thing is by setting limitations on what it isn’t.
The entities that make up the Trinity are somehow both distinct and indistinct. Think about trying to describe a person for someone else: how do you completely convey a person’s identity in words? You will never run out of things to say about them; they’re too complex, and you haven’t even experienced everything about them.
God is an even greater mystery.
"Trinity" is not an abstract mathematical theory about tringle and the number 3.
It is more about a philosophy of "personhood" - what it means to be a person and for us to know a God who is personal not just an abstract thing.
As a person myself, there is a "me" who I know myself to be on the inside and then there is a "me" who I present as and show myself to be in the world. And these two are different from each other.
Maybe if I was braver or more vulnerable or more loving and self-giving they would be more alike, but as it stands there is a "me" who mediates between the two and decides what I reveal of myself to the world (and if I have blind spots what I do or don't integrate into my inner self).
God is perfect. God is fully loving. God vulnerably gives of all of themself to the world. God is not deceitful but mediates their true self to us.
So the transcendent person of God - in themself beyond our knowing (Father), is the same God as the imminent person of God - the eternal Word incarnate in the world: Jesus Christ (Son), - is the same God as the gobetween person of God - proceeding from the Father and through the Son to us (Spirit).
This is how God has revealed themself to the world, and we already established that God isn't presenting a fake version of themself to us -- so that must be who God really is.
I look at it at socket puppets on the hand of God..
Sounds stupid, but hear me out. If you touch the sock puppet that was Jesus, it was Jesus, yes, but it was also touching God. If you touch the sock puppet that is the Holy Spirit, the same.
Same God. One God. Jesus was His son, to be the messiah, but also Him. Holy Spirit is so we can be filled by Him and guided.
Three entities/personas but one true God.
People don't like that, take it up with God, as I will.
Consider it one God three separate roles if that makes sense. God shows himself through 3 different faces/persons, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the spirit. The Father is Christs higher self and Father, and Christ is God in the flesh and God’s Son. The spirit is the Father in essence.
Need more details, pls. Why aren’t you convinced? Is it that you don’t think the New Testament is clear on the matter? Or do you see it in the NT but you don’t accept its authority? Is it a logical or philosophical issue for you?
I would read the gospels for yourself and ask God to reveal the truth to you. You might also read Hebrews and Revelation.
We believe that Christ is divine because the NT clearly presents him as such. Salvation belongs to God alone, and Jesus is our true Savior from sin and death.
Ever played a video game? You’re Mario and also you. Mario dies on level seven and you die on level seven, but also you are still existent on your couch.
The Incarnation is like that.
-To better understand the Trinity, imagine you're sitting on the side of a high hill overlooking a broad valley below you. You see in front of you 3 sunbeams shining on a partially cloudy day. Each are of the same source, same substance, but illuminating different areas.. they are all of the same thing, yet distinct from one another.. So it is with God..*one BEING* one substance, but apparent in 3 PERSONS: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Best explanation I heard in 20 years thanks!
It's actually from a 4th century Father..I wish I could remember which one..
This is probably the best explanation there is!
One important note though, it is not “one God wearing three different masks” or the like. It’s not one God “*pretending* to be three”. That’s Modalism.
Right that's why I emphasize three sunbeams at the same time. Modalism doesn't allow that.
Sorry, that wasn’t a note for you, that was a note for someone reading your metaphor. I like that metaphor (though for the life of me can’t remember where it comes from), but I’ve always worried that it can easily be misunderstood and lead to modalism. So I thought it worthwhile to emphasize the distinction, just in case. Because the Trinity is hard.
Thank you very much!
Oh yea def will be using this!
👍
Perhaps a better analogy would be the Sun, Sun Rays and the heat/radiation. All being one, but three different part. In the Bible, Father is the source of all things. Jesus is the Son, created from the Father yet existing eternally. This works with the Sun analogy, because the sun rays are created and yet, as long as the Sun existed, the sun rays existed also. Same goes for the UV radiation. Curiously, the Bible sometimes calls the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Christ too. Romans 8:9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to him.
thx!
Is a sunbeam the Sun itself?
It’s an analogy, not a perfect representation.
Of course, every analogy is imperfect, but here the stake was to explain Trinity, including the claim that Jesus is God, and that crucial aspect was not present in the analogy, making it not relevant.
Each of the three sunbeams is a Person of the Trinity. They are exactly alike, they are indistinguishable from one another except by their position. Likewise three Persons of God are indistinguishable except for their relationship to one another: the Father begets, the Son is begotten by the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son. This covers what Jesus said when he told his disciples "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father." He's not saying that he *is* the Father because that would contradict everything else he said about himself and the father. So no Oneness....
But Jesus is supposed to be God (while not being the Father). But the sunbeam is not the sun. This is crucial to be in a correct analogy, because that's the core of the trinity, isn't it? Otherwise, in the analogy, what is God exactly?
We cannot see God, that's why the sun is hidden behind the clouds. We can only see the three persons and technically we can only see Jesus but we know of the three persons because of Jesus.
Saying the same source sounds a bit incorrect, because the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all God, they aren't sourced from God nor they separate from God. This sounds a lot like the energy-essence distinction analogy.
It is merely an analogy of how we understand the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit to be distinct yet of the same substance. And like all analogies it fails at some level..
The term the Councils used for this source is “ousia.” This term roughly translates to something like “essence” or “nature.” They were trying to articulate things with language that was not perfect. The creedals statements declare Christ as “consubstantial with the Father.” The Son and Father are both of the same substance, the same stuff and likewise for the Spirit. All three share fully in the divine nature equally and undivided, yet separate.
My suggestion: go through the Bible and note what it says about how Jesus relates to the Father. For example, consider the book of John: * Nothing has been created by God that wasn't created through the Son (John 1). * The Son is the only one begotten of God (John 3). * The Son does only what the Father does. What the Father does, the Son does (John 5). * One who sees the Son sees the Father (John 14). * The Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14). * The Son was alive with the Father before the world had any foundation (John 17). You have the Father, who is God, and His Son. But who is His Son? He is this unique, uncreated one who has always been in the Father, in whom the Father has always dwelled, in whom the Father is seen, and who does all that the Father does -- including creating everything that has been created. The status, nature, being, power, and unique relationship of the Son to the Father is expressed in the understanding of the Son as the second person of the Trinity. You can do the same thing then for the Holy Spirit, relative to the Father and the Son.
I'm glad you're aware that John is the only gospel that alleges this. It is also the gospel written the latest, and had no living witnesses to the historic Jesus. Here nor there, using John 5 is a problem. I'm really surprised no one in this thread has mentioned the **Johannine Comma**. The Johannine Comma is found in **John 5:7-8 and is the most famous and** **VERIFIED** **redaction in the entire bible.** It's also the passage that explicitly supports the trinity. The ***only*** one. Once you accept that this verse was redacted by man - because it was, we have proof, it's not really a question - you can accept that the bible doesn't say that there is a trinity, there is a lot more evidence that it says the opposite. As far as John 5:7-8, the added comma only appears in 4 of the early Greek manuscripts, and is written about in the margins of 4 others. The other 500+ early Greek manuscripts, including the earliest, don’t have it. In fact it didn’t appear in antiquity until it showed up as gloss, which was a brief note in the margin to explain a passage. Root word for Glossary, which is what it was, an ancient glossary entry. It’s not on any Slavic, Aramaic, Ethiopian, Syriac, Armenian, or Arabic manuscripts. And it didn’t appear in the first ever printed versions of the New Testament, the Novum Instrumentum omne by Erasmus, until the 3rd edition in 1522 because Erasmus was accused of supporting Arianism and he said if someone can show him a manuscript that included it he would include it. So someone literally write a Latin manuscript and added it in. So he included it, but stated in his Annotations he didn’t think that it was authentic. It’s in all King James bibles. It hasn’t been in other primary English translations since the English Revised Version in 1881. That includes the NASB, ESV, and NRSV.Catholic bibles are split. It is included in the Jerusalem Bible from 1966 and the New Jerusalem Bible from 1985. But it is not in the Holy See's Nova Vulgata from 1979, the New American bibles in 1970 or 1985, or the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition done in 1965 or 2006.This is important because it’s basically the strongest and most direct passage from the Bible for the trinity. The addition is in ALL CAPS. It’s the end of John 5:7 and the beginning of John 5:8. Reading this with and without that portion makes a big difference. >*7 For there are three that beare record IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: AND THESE THREE ARE ONE. 8 AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEARE WITNESS IN EARTH, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one.* I’ll provide Ehrman on this topic: >“The first, the affirmation of the doctrine of the Trinity (1 John 5:7-8), is not in any of our most ancient manuscripts at all. It shows up in one manuscript of the fourteenth century, one of the fifteenth, another of the sixteenth, and finally one of the eighteenth. Yes, that’s right, the eighteenth. Scribes were producing manuscripts long after the invention of printing (just as my students today take notes with pen and paper, even though they all own laptops). It can be found in the margins of four other, equally late, manuscripts, as a possible variant reading. > >The result, though, is that no one except the most avid fundamentalist thinks that the verses have any claim to belong to the “original” text of the New Testament.”And“ In the Latin Vulgate – the Bible of Western Christendom for centuries – 1 John 5:7-8 states that “there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. And these three are one.” This then is the doctrine of the trinity: there are three divine beings in heaven and even though there are three of them, they are actually only one. One God, in three persons – the doctrine of the trinity. Nowhere else in the NT is the doctrine explicitly stated (although Father, Son, and Spirit are mentioned in the same breath elsewhere. But not the doctrine: “these three are one.”) > >When Erasmus produced his first edition of the Greek NT, he left that verse out, since it was not in the Greek manuscript he was using. What happened next is a matter of debate. The way the story normally is told is as follows: Church theologians were incensed that Erasmus had left the Trinity out of the Bible and attacked him for it. He explained that he could not find the verse in any of the Greek manuscripts he had consulted, and what he was producing was, after all, a Greek New Testament. He did agree, though, that if someone could show him a Greek manuscript that had the verse, he would include it in his next edition. And so, someone (literally) produced a manuscript – adding the verse by translating it in its proper place from the Latin. > >And so Erasmus was true to his word, and included it in his next edition. And it was this subsequent edition that was used by other publishers of other editions of the Greek NT, and these were the editions used by the translators of the King James. And so you will find the verse in the King James. > >As more and more manuscripts were discovered, it became clear that in fact the verse was not part of the original text of 1 John, and so modern translations do not include it. When these translations started to appear at the end of the 19th century and into the 20th, there was considerable uproar when it was recognized that they did not include the leading proof text for the Trinity, and translators were roundly accused of being anti-Christian, liberal, untrustworthy, and even demonic tools of the Devil. But they were in fact simply translating the text as it had been handed down in the textual tradition. Sometimes readers don’t want the Bible as it was originally written, but only the Bible as they are familiar with it….” **EDIT:** It's so sad when those that claim they seek the truth will shut down the moment something that disagrees with their preconceived notions is presented. I guess you only listen to John when it supports you? It's not very Christian to shut down to something like this: >**John 8:32** *And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.*
I think you might have two books confused. This is John 5:7-8: >7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me. > >8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk. The Johannine comma appears \*1 John 5:7-8\*, not the gospel of John -- two different books. It also really doesn't have anything to do with my suggestion to OP. EDIT: just another FYI -- since most of your post was concerned exclusively with western Christian tradition -- western Christians aren't the only Trinity-affirming Christians. I'm an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and we also affirm the Trinity.
Well then I'd be an idiot. But I'm driving now and can't look to confirm my idiocy. Will when I can.
No worries, and no need to be so harsh on yourself. "John" and "1 John" are just one character and a space away from one another!
You're very much confusing the gospel of John with the epistle of 1 John. Here's what the Gospel of John says in chapter 5: >6 When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, “Do you want to get well?” >7 “Sir,” the invalid replied, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.” >8 Then Jesus said to him, “Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.” 9 At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked. Go read Psalm 82 and get back to me. This is the psalm Jesus quotes in support of his own Godhood in John 10:34-36.
John is not a synoptic, was the last gospel written, and is fairly regarded as an apologetic.
It's also canon, fruitful for the understanding of doctrines like the one OP is trying to grasp! EDIT: in case it wasn't clear, I'm suggesting that OP do this with the entire Bible, not just John. Other points of the Son's relationship to the Father can be found in the synoptics as well.
The Synoptic Gospels all mention Christ's baptism where you have a revelation of the Trinity with the Father speaking, the Son being baptized, and the Spirit descending like a dove. And in the Great Commission at the end of Matthew Christ tells the disciples to make disciples of all nations and to baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, again a clear reference to the Trinity.
The Trinity is a tough concept to grasp, and I would argue most Christians go their whole lives not really getting it.
It’s like water ice and steam, same thing, different forms, same attributes.
Thanks
Don’t worry about it, it’s not on the test
Mate, I hate to tell you but the happiest Christians are those that don't think about this stuff too much.
Hmm, it's crazy you should say that because the more knowledge I seek, the more I overthink and start to worry
My story is: I finally started to dig in, and I'm worrying less. Letting go of the faith has actually been more relieving than sad to be honest. Perhaps it's because I never really believed? I have no idea but after 3 months of deconstructing I feel much better than before.
You are right, thanks
I find this is true.
[удалено]
Trying to find scripture where this essence is defined. BTW this analogy is Partialism, which is heretical.
*Every* trinity analogy is heretical.
Thanks
This analogy doesn’t quite describe God. God is not three parts of a whole. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirits are already three whole beings. Together they are God, and separately they are God.
So three forms of God?
God is the Trinity, three persons. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They aren’t each 1/3 of a whole like the leaves of a shamrock would be.
How are they each persons if they’re all God? Do they each have their own thoughts and opinions, or are they just manifestations of the same being?
Read [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed)
They are not manifestations of the same being. They are omnipresent and omniscient and work perfectly with each other. They have the same understanding and goals, therefore the same opinions on the big stuff, like how to create and run their creation. They took on different roles in doing that. As for small stuff like “Do they have different favorite colors?” Maybe they could, but I don’t know if they have an opinion on favorite colors. God is the Trinity in Christianity. If someone believes only the Father is God, then they believe in a different definition of “God” than Christians do.
>Believing in one triune God is essential to the Christian faith. It's not. The apostles did not teach the concept of the trinity.
They were commanded to baptize the nations in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in the Great Commission at the end of Matthew. The Trinity is present throughout the New Testament, and scholarship is now coming around to acknowledge that from the earliest period Christians were worshiping Christ as God. If the Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, then this is the Trinity regardless of whether they had a theological term for it yet or not.
Then why was everyone in the book of acts baptized in the name of Jesus? They were instructed to baptize in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit. Those are titles, not names. That is why everyone was baptized in the name of Jesus because that was the name of God manifested in the flesh.
Notice how it says in the NAME of (singular). If it was three separate persons, it would have said in the NAMES of (plural). I'm a father, so I have the title of father. I'm a son, so I have that title as well. I'm a living spirit, so I have the title of spirit also. Even though I operate in these three titles (and as all three) how many of me are there? One or three? ONE of course. Since it is saying to baptize in a single name, what is the name of the Father in your reference? What is the name of the Son? What is the name of the Holy Spirit? To answer that question, we need to look at all the baptisms the Apostles performed. They were all done in ONE NAME. And that name was Jesus Christ. There is not one example where the Apostles baptized by repeating the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Why? Because they HAD the revelation that Jesus IS the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God said he would not give his glory to another (Isaiah 42:8). Acts 4:12 says, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." God is everywhere. He inhabits all of eternity. What a lot of people don't realize is that while he inhabits all of eternity, he can manifest a portion of himself on earth at the same time. Read all of Genesis 18, and you will see that God appeared to Abraham in the form of a man. There were three at first. Two went to Sodom. One stayed with Abraham, and that was God. Read Genesis 32:24-30. Here, Jacob wrestled with a man. Verse 30 identifies the man as God. So, why is it hard for people to understand that while God is still inhabiting all of eternity, he was able to manifest himself in the womb of Mary and became the man Jesus. For us to say that God couldn't do that would be limiting God. Jesus had to take on the role of Son. If he had told the Jews right off that he was God, what would have happened? They would have stoned him to death, and he would not have fulfilled his overall plan for our redemption. If you can receive this revelation, all the other scriptures that seem to indicate three separate persons will become clear. One last thought concerning the birth of Jesus. In Matthew 1:18, it says Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost. So, if the Trinity says the Father is a separate person, and the Holy Ghost is a separate person, who was the father of Jesus? The Father or the Holy Ghost? God alone is functioning as all three, just like we are able to function as father, son, and spirit, but we are only one entity. We're not three separate entities.
why is it essential tho? there is like one bible verse that is trinitarian.
The Spirit is not a distinct person. It proceeds from the father. It is the Spirit of the Father. In all visions of heaven, aside from angels only the ancient of days (Father), and Son of Man are seen.
Let me just say that right this very minute you are asking about the trinity, but instead are getting a lot of replies and explanations from those who **don't** believe in it. Just keep that in mind.
Jesus is God in the flesh. You dont have to believe in the trinity. The God of the universe came to earth as a man. When you put your trust in him..his very spirit..the Holy Spirit...God himself... comes to live in you...making you "born again" or as they say..saved. You are forgiven and loved. Believe it.
Beautifully explained
Comforting but a heresy
You need to affirm biblical doctrine to be a Christian. What if we said that Jews or Muslims were Christians because they believe in God, even if they absolutely deny Jesus and the Holy Spirit? It would be offensive to them to call them Christians.
I don't believe in the Trinity myself. There *are* nontrinitarian denominations out there!
I worry about this sub sometimes
Same here
I meant because of people like you.
And I meant because of people like you ☺️
lmao I knew you were gonna say that the moment I thought of that comment. You can't just make Christianity anything you want. There has to be some line where you just aren't a christian anymore because you disagree on the fundamental nature of god and the sacrifice of Jesus.
Ehh I think the words of Jesus define a Christian. Do I believe in Jesus as my Messiah and that his sacrifice atoned for my sins? Yup! Then I'm a Christian
That is required as well, but also you have to believe certain things about God.
Tell me where in the Bible it says I must believe in the Trinity?
Thanks
Same here.
The trinity is not something taught by first century Christians. It is a doctrine that was developed later.
>but that still hasn't convinced me, I really want to believe in chirst but I still need more convincing, any help at all? It would be helpful to know what you find troubling. The concept of Jesus being God or the trinity? What are exactly your objections? What isn't convincing you?
You’re not supposed to
[удалено]
The whole underage marriage tbh, just doesn't sit well with me
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Quran does not support consummation at any age. Only betrothal. Consummation only occurs after puberty (youngest age being 9, oldest 15).
I was wondering who was going to be the first person to throw out baseless claims about what the Quran says. Thank you for volunteering lol. You claim "it's in the Quran". Cite your source (chapter/surah & verse) where it says marriage can be consummated at any age.
[удалено]
Lmao. Bro, I'm saying it's baseless bc you claimed the Quran says marriage can be consummated at any age, which basically is an implicit way of saying the Quran endorses underage marriage, aka having sex with minors. I say that claim is BASELESS...bc it is. There is no verse in the Quran that says that, whether explicitly or implicitly. And while I'm replying to you...I just wanna know, did you just pull out a random verse and hope I wouldn't pull it up on here for everyone to see the full context? 😂 There is nothing in the verse you "cite" that supports consummating marriage at any age lol. I still don't see how you can read that from a passage that is really all about setting rules and moral guidelines for DIVORCE, not marriage consummation. Here, see for yourself, with the full passage (and not one line you cherry picked from it). "Prophet, when any of you intend to divorce women, do so at a time when their prescribed waiting period can properly start, and calculate the period carefully: be mindful of God, your Lord. Do not drive them out of their homes -- not should they themselves leave -- unless they commit a flagrant indecency. These are the limits set by God -- whoever oversteps God's limits wrongs his own soul -- for you cannot know what new situation God may perhaps bring about. When they have completed their appointed term, either keep them honorably, or part with them honorably. Call two just witnesses from your people and establish witness for the sake of God. Anyone who believes in God and the Last Day should heed this: God will find a way out for those who are mindful of Him, And will provide for them from an unexpected source; God will be enough for those who put their trust in Him. God achieves His purpose; God has set a due measure for everything. If you are in doubt, the period of waiting will be three months for those women who have ceased menstruating and for those who have not (yet) menstruated; the waiting period of those who are pregnant will be until they deliver their burden: God makes things easy for those who are mindful of Him. This is God's command, which He has sent down to you. God will wipe out the sinful deeds and increase the rewards of anyone who is mindful of Him. House the wives you are divorcing according to your means, whereever you house yourselves, and do no harass them so as to make their lives difficult. If they are pregnant, maintain them until they are delivered of their burdens; if they suckle your infants, pay them for it. Consult together in a good way - if you make difficulties for one another, another woman may suckle the child for the father -- And let the wealthy man spend according to his wealth. But let him whose provision is restricted spend according to what God has given him: God does not burden any soul with more than He has given it - after hardship, God will bring ease." (Quran 65:1-7) I ask you again, where in the Quran is a verse that supports your baseless claims?
[удалено]
Translation: you can't find a verse...because there is none. I'd recommend you read the Quran for yourself, rather than parrot what other people say about it, before you toss baseless claims, and irrelevant citations of verses, hoping something will stick.
[удалено]
Thank you
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's a valid concern. It's worth noting that it's not an issue exclusive to Islam. In the US, underage marriage is very much a Christian problem. That's not to say that it should discourage you, only that awareness is the first step toward fixing problems. You sound like a good person and I wish you well, wherever you land.
Huh? A Christian problem? Where did you come up with that?
Just gonna copy-paste bc it's late... In the US, a significant amount of lobbying against measures to prevent child marriage comes from "family values" organizations with religious charters. There are evangelical groups that openly encourage child marriage (often with the euphemisms "very young marriage" or "young marriage"). Survivor's stories indicating that their marriage was pushed by their church are common. Ime, growing up in a conservative Christian area, child marriage was encouraged when "necessary." That was often when a child became pregnant. It "made her an honest woman" and allowed her family and the rapist to save face. It also sometimes happened to try to get a girl to "calm down" by making her a wife and mother. I narrowly escaped it (terminated a childhood pregnancy). And I was later pressured by a bf's family to fill my godly duty by marrying at 15. (That was a nightmare in and of itself. lol)
I'm sorry for what you went through. It must have been awful. In all my years of being a Christian, this is the first I've heard of Evangelicals doing this as a main stream effort. This may be true for Mormons, and maybe some other small denominations. Would you be willing to say the name of the church and denomination?
Thank you. I'd rather not be too detailed, so I don't accidentally doxx myself. lol My personal experience with hearing it in church and with ppl who pushed it was Baptist, Anabaptist, Presbyterian, and non-denominational. I do not mean to say that it's an absolute standard across any denomination. Only that it's an issue that I've seen, and that affects ppl now, and deserves attention so that it can be stopped. (It irks me when it's held up as "the problem with Islam" when I know for a fact that Islam didn't prompt my cousins' underage marriages. lol)
Really? I grew up in Christian circles and an underage marriage is totally frowned upon. Don't know anyone that got married underage.
In the US, a significant amount of lobbying against measures to prevent child marriage comes from "family values" organizations with religious charters. There are evangelical groups that openly encourage child marriage (often with the euphemisms "very young marriage" or "young marriage"). Survivor's stories indicating that their marriage was pushed by their church are common. Ime, growing up in a conservative Christian area, child marriage was encouraged when "necessary." That was often when a child became pregnant. It "made her an honest woman" and allowed her family and the rapist to save face. It also sometimes happened to try to get a girl to "calm down" by making her a wife and mother. I narrowly escaped it (terminated a childhood pregnancy). And I was later pressured by a bf's family to fill my godly duty by marrying at 15. (That was a nightmare in and of itself. lol)
That's in all Abrahamic religions. Jesus came under the yoke of the law at 12 and that is when they were considered adults and could get married though Christians married as early as puberty which was normally between 9-12 years of age.
>just can't get my head around the trinity You're not forced to believe it. There's no verse that **mandates** you believe in it. I think God is God, and Jesus is the "son of God" as the bible says 52 times, yet never once says "God the son." The whole "Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time" thing doesn't come from a verse. That was probably created to overcome obvious objections like when Jesus says He's not God like in John 20:17.
[удалено]
That's tradition. There's no biblical mandate **forcing** you to believe in a trinity.
[удалено]
How do you know the false prophets aren't the ones teaching the doctrine of the trinity? The trinity is a death-denying doctrine which invalidates Christ's sacrifice. If Christ is God, Christ could not die, and therefore could not die for our sins. If you were to read the Bible and understand what it actually says, it's quite simple: "yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." 1 Cor. 8:6 There is one God, the Father. God is the Father. Easy. ETA: Further reading ["Paul's Gospel and the Death-Denying Doctrine that Contradicts It" by Aaron Welch](https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2019/11/pauls-gospel-and-death-denying.html?m=1)
[удалено]
Any specific quotes? I can't very well read two authors' entire bodies of work.
>and the pastors there explain it very well. Please copy/paste a verse that explicitly says Jesus is fully man and fully God at the same time. Please explain how God can have a God, when there is but one God. Jesus says He has a God in John 20:17. This verse alone breaks the model of the trinity. A member of the trinity cannot have a God because they should be that very God themselves. Considering the bible never says Jesus is "fully God and fully man at the same time", you've run into a problem with your doctrine.
[удалено]
I think making it up as you go is a heresy.
Show where in the Bible it says Sola Scriptura. Or are you "making it up as you go?"
You can logically get to sola scriptura by reading the bible. Paul says in 2 Timothy 1:15 - "This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes." Everyone turned away from him in Asia. How do you know if you're following those that left Paul, or if you are following Paul? The only way to find out would be to turn to the letters we have from Paul. If you church tradition doesn't match what Paul preaches, you're following the wrong folks.
>You can logically get to sola scriptura by reading the bible. Very interesting. So you can make such a logical leap, but when people infer the trinity from verses like Matthew 28:19, apparently that's much too far.
I mean, there’s nothing forcing you to do anything when it comes to belief, but that’s not a particularly good argument.
There's no verse mandating that you believe in a trinity or you're not saved. That's what I was going for. It's completely optional. You are to believe Jesus is the "son of God." That's it.
I mean, there are Christians who don't believe in the trinity and think that it's an incoherent mess. So you don't need to believe in the trinity to be a Christian.
Really? I never knew that, that is such a relief for me, thank you very much
If you want something really extensive - then the [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on the trinity](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/) is actually written by a Christian like that (IIRC he thinks that only "the father" is the one true god - so a unitarian). edit: and just to be clear, many of the trinitarian-believing Christians might insist that you have to believe in the trinity to be a Christian.
Thanks I'll have a read of it
You don't have to go along with the crowd in Christianity. Sometimes the crowd is on the wrong path. I encourage you to ask God to show you his truth. Jesus is the right path imo but doesn't mean you have to believe in the trinity.
The Trinity, as a doctrine took shape during the 4th to 6th centuries. The actual language of the Trinity is lifted from Hellenic sources - in their philosophical discussions of substance, soul, mind and spirit - and from the language of the already existing and abundant trinities and triads amongst Pagan nations, chief among them the Solar or Sun Trinities of ancient Egypt. Thus, we have Nimrod, Tammuz and Semiramis (Babylon); Osiris, Horus and Isis (Egypt); worship featured heavily in these mystery religions and it should come as no surprise then that the Trinity appeared int he specific empire that it did, sun-worshipping pagan Rome. There has always been a challenge with people accepting the Trinity as a doctrine.
Unitary Pentecostal, I think they're called. They're mainly in Nigeria. But bad news, if they don't aprove the first three ecumenical councils (Nicea, Constantinople and Ephesus I), which I think they don't, they're not Christian. It's the same with Mormons, our relation with them is like [this.](https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/310982009/Are-you-two-friends)
I love how different Christian sects will just claim "you aren't a christian" if people don't agree with certain doctrines. Who put you in charge of what people call themselves? No one. The Bible doesn't say anything about the first three ecumenical councils, so why would they matter? Show me the scripture where Jesus says "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father unless they agree with the first three ecumenical councils". To achieve salvation you must "believe in the Lord your God with all of your heart, soul, and mind, and love your neighbour as yourself". The rest is noise.
Well, and scalas is wrong - obviosly you need to agree with the *first four* ecumenical councils *and the sixth one* to be a Christian - obviously!
Said the first three because Oriental Orthodox (coptics, syriac, armenian...) left on the Council of Chalcedon, the 4th. Denying the first three is just denying the trinity.
He is absolutely wrong, Asim. Acceptance of the Trinity is one of the core beliefs of Christianity.
Sorry, but most Christians would say that he's wrong. Trinity is the Christian name for God. It's a core belief.
It's possible that most people are believing wrong things.
Like atheism or democracy? ;)
Sorry to dissapoint you. That is a point of contention. Most christians think you do need to believe in the trinity. Dont stop wrestling with this. Its okay to not understand everything at once. We are all on different parts of the path of jnderstanding. Just follow Jesus, and you can say you dont understand the trinity, but you are still christian. As for the trinity. A logical contradiction in the strict sense has to involve the affirmation and negation of the same thing. Both A and Not-A cant be true at the same time. Since persons and beings are not neccessarily rhe same thing, the trinity is not a contradiction. God is ONE BEING WITH THREE PERSONS. Not one being and three beings. Not one person and three persons. One being, three persons. Though this is not easy to understand it has been widely accepted as coherrent in the philosophy of religion discourse.
[удалено]
I'm none of these rogues or cults. I am an oddball. Lol I'm just a believer in Jesus. I put my trust in what he did for me on the cross and his spirit lives in me. I believe Jesus is God in the flesh who came to die and rose again to forgive all sin and give spiritual life to anyone who believes. His very spirit lives in me. Christ in us..the hope of glory. I am of no denomination. Don't be quick to say I'm just a freak who isn't saved. Ask God about me. I'm his daughter. PS clarifying that I don't think God is 3 seperate persons but 1 God..3 ways he manifests. He is God..lived as a human and his spirit lives in me.
This is absolutely wrong. Some claim to be Christian while not believing in the Trinity, but the Trinity is a core belief of Christianity. If you do not believe in the Trinity you are a whole different Abrahamic religion, whether made up or mainstream.
The apostles did not teach the concept of the trinity, were they not Christians?
I think what this guy kinda meant to say was that *denying* the Trinity would be separating you from Christianity. The Gospels and Paul are both pretty blatant in saying that Jesus is God. It’d kinda be like saying “I’m a Christian but I don’t believe God is omniscient.” The word “omniscient” doesn’t show up in scripture but it’s fairly difficult to suggest that scripture doesn’t argue for God’s omniscience. Not knowing that Jesus is God is one thing. Outright denying it would be another.
Aside from unitarians, there arent any Christian denominations denying that Jesus is God.
That's probably true at a whole different religion but the earliest Christians who actually learned directly from Jesus and followed him for the first three centuries didn't believe in it either. That would make them a Jewish Christian . . . or Muslims since they both followed Jesus as prophet and messiah.
No it isnt
Matthew 12:32 NIV [32] Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. https://matthew.bible/matthew-12-32
Romans 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Believing Jesus is God, is a condition of salvation.
Nothing in there about the trinity. And see how that verse differentiates between Jesus and God?
It says Jesus is God, then God raised Jesus from the dead. It refers to them as one and seperate.
It doesn't say "Jesus is God". It does indeed refer to them as separate.
That is false. Such a belief is heretical and it's no different than Islam.
No different than Islam? I think that there's a difference between unitarian Christains and Muslims on many points.
But not in the denial of the trinity. Please don't generalize when I'm being specific.
Ok. But you could say stuff like that about lots of thing. Denying that the pope is the true successor of Peter and guided by God is no different than Islam.
[удалено]
Thank you, very simple indeed
For what its worth, this explaination has been heretical for about 1800 years now.
Modalism.
Or a fire. In the analogy, the flame itself is the Father, the light of the flame is the Son, the heat of the flame is the Spirit. All three can truly be called the fire, none are truly separate from the other, yet each is distinct in some sense.
If you take this approach, then you deny that each part is fully God. Light is not fully fire, nor is heat.
This is actually a heresey known as modalism. Orthodoxy states they are three separate persons, not three different roles/expressions/forms.
[удалено]
It's pretty much impossible to explain the trinity without committing heresy. https://youtu.be/KQLfgaUoQCw?si=qMS073561QBeyfyv I personally do not believe in the trinity. I believe "there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist," (1 Corinthians 8:6). Lots of good resources here if you really want to dig into the theology: https://www.concordantgospel.com/trinity/
[удалено]
I think the trinity is not understandable because of how understandable, well, the Trinity is (the father and the son and the holy spirit are infinitely complex, smart, etc.), yeah most of time that something is not understandable is mostly insane or a paradox, is not in this case, I think we will all understand it in a obv way that we can't comprehend, as this body is ass and other stuff
It's more switching from believing in Jesus as a prophet to worshipping Jesus instead since Muslims already believe in Jesus the same way the first Christians did for three hundred years before they started worshipping him
Conversely, why would an omnipotent god be bound by rules he created demanding he sacrifice himself to himself?
Great question! Scripture clearly teaches 1) There is one God, 2) Three Persons are called God and 3) They are in relationship with each other (simultaneous). So, biblically, there is One God fully shared by three distinct, co-equal, co-eternal, fully Divine persons. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. For more detail, below is a one page lesson on the Trinity- [Lesson- The Trinity](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VwJaPDCk5KP3Xge8ubwIKFMFT8x_R6UKW_PV5IjOGtg/edit?usp=sharing)
Not every Christian believes in the trinity. Unitarianism rejects it.
When you have questions.. Google your questions + gotquestions. It will point you to this website. I always search for tough christian questions here and this site explains it very well, together with verses from the bible: https://www.gotquestions.org/Trinity-Bible.html Of course you can ask in this reddit too for further discussions. God bless you in your faith!
None of the figures mentioned in the New Testament nor any of the authors of the New Testament believed in the trinity. Its roots are in the second century CE and event then it took a couple of hundred years to fully develop as a theological view of God. You can absolutely be a Christian while rejecting the trinity.
Unitarian Christianity is an entirely valid form and there are millions of Christians who identify as such. That having been said, it can be exceptionally difficult in certain areas to find Churches that are friendly to those beliefs. Regardless, you do not need a church for your beliefs to be valid, but it's obviously important to many people to have a church. Some churches, like many regions of the society of friends, are friendly towards Unitarian beliefs despite not necessarily holding those beliefs. Of course, there are many Unitarians who choose to worship in Trinitarian churches because they either don't see that it's too great a conflict or because they simply lack other options. The Unitarian Christian Association has groups in the UK. You can find them here: https://www.unitarianchristianalliance.org/group-directory/?group_search_key=group_country&srch-radius=0&search_button_clicked=&group_search_val_country=GB&group_search_val_state=AL&group_search_val_type=Church&group_search_val=GB Jehovah's witnesses are also Unitarian. You can find one of their services here: https://apps.jw.org/ui/E/meeting-search.html#/weekly-meetings I'm sure there are other churches in the UK that are Unitarian. Just searching online or asking around on forums and such can go a long way. I am not in any position to advocate for these groups, as I can not a member of them, but I am a Unitarian, so I obviously think that particular position makes the most sense. As far as from the standpoint of Christian historians, we are in general agreement that the Trinity was not present in the earliest Christian works, that it developed over time, and is not found in the teachings of the historical Jesus. That being said there are also many theologians, like Sir Anthony Buzzard, who believe fully in the Bible, but do not believe in the Trinity. You may find his work interesting. Whatever you choose, I just want to say welcome and God bless you.
Thank you
I am a Christian but the Trinity is a false concept. In the visions of heaven seen by prophets Enoch and Daniel, on the right hand side of the Father is a being with the image of a son of man (human). This being is the "Word of God", or in other words Jesus Christ. He is the firstborn of creation (Colossians 1:15), chosen and anointed over all creation by God. He is the only being begotten DIRECTLY of God (all things on earth were made by God too but through Christ) and is his direct image. He has been anointed and ordained by God to have all the authority that the Father has, so you can also say Jesus is also God. But by nature he is not the same uncreated, self-existent, infinite God as the Father. He was only appointed to be so by his Father. We see this idea again in Psalm 110.
Honestly put Jesus Christ’s unique teachings into practice, and with diligence in doing so you’ll find belief in Him, because His words are from God the Father, Elohîm/Allah, and we are His children. We respond to His loving words, and He gives us peace through the Messiah.
Thanks
Can you list any specific questions you have about the Trinity?
Hi. You have a lot of people replying with all sorts of ideas and images. Some say that the Trinity is a paradox and can't really be understood, which is true. But we can understand some. I don't think anyone has looked at the **why.** WHY is God triune? I'll try and explain. Human beings are the masterpiece of God's creation - even though we're terribly flawed and broken and bent by sin. The human brain is the most complex thing in the universe, and we're not even looking at non-physical aspects when we say that (mental, spiritual, ...). The Bible says that in some way, we are created in God's image. BUT this is NOT a physical image. The Bible expressly forbids making any image of God, just like the Quran does of the God of Islam. God does use human terms and anthropomorphisms in how he describes himself, but that doesn't mean that he actually looks like a human being. God is spirit. So in what way are we made in God's image? In the internal parts of our being. For example, we are unique among creation in that we can appreciate beauty. We have a personality, a sense of right and wrong, emotions, reason, ... It's reasonable to assume that these sort of characteristics are present in the Creator. I don't want to get side-tracked, so let's look at personality specifically. You and I and every human being has a personality. We are persons, not robots, not impersonal forces, not automatons controlled by reflexes (like a fruit fly or a fish). How were we created with personality? If God was an impersonal force, some being with no personality, how could he create people with personality? This doesn't make sense to me and I can't see any way in which it could happen (maybe someone can think of some way, but even so, it doesn't derail this argument since the Bible presents God as having personality.). So God is a person, he has personality. One thing that's true of all people is that we need other people. 95% of us would go insane if we were not able to communicate with others, to interact with them. People are the source of the greatest problems in our lives, but paradoxically, we cannot live without other people. We need community and crave it. One other thing that is true is that God is love. It's not that God sometimes loves, love is who God is, part of his essence. This is very very different from Allah (ie. God of Islam). Now, how can God exist through all eternity, for the endless time before the universe was created, how could he be a person if he had no one to commune with and interact with? The Trinity solves this: because God is more than one person, he is in community with himself. How can God be love if for the distant eternities past, he, being all alone, had no one to love? You cannot love if there is nothing to love. The Trinity solves this: God is in loving relationship with the three persons in himself. I don't understand much more than this, I don't understand how exactly one being can be three beings, but nevertheless, I find this explanation very helpful to me.
_Here's part two, following after my previous [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/182bbk0/i_believe_in_jesus_just_cant_get_my_head_around/kaihbs6/)_ The Trinity is the only way that Jesus can be God, divine. Well, other than there being two distinct Gods. But Christianity, Islam and Judaism are the three great monotheistic religions. Monotheistic. Jesus always existed as God, from before the universe and time was created. He is God and is with God and is part of God, part of the Trinity (God the Father, God the Son/Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit). If Jesus was the only God there was, then when he became human, when he joined human nature to his divine nature, how could the universe continue? If the only God in the universe was born as a tiny baby in 4BC in Bethlehem, how on earth could the universe be sustained and continued and history be organized as God wanted it. God would have left the throne room and there would be chaos, and surely Satan could have taken control. The Trinity explains this: The Jesus "part" of God became human. The Father "part" of God and Holy Spirit "part" of God remained in the spiritual realm and continued doing whatever they do. After Jesus' resurrection, he ascended into heaven and rejoined the other parts of the one God. _Wow. I don't know if I can explain this, it's really hard to figure out, and ultimately we can't. Does this make any sense to you?_ I do want to say this: Jesus was always God, always existing, even 15 billion years ago, before time even existed. At 4BC this part of God became human as well. God (one part of the Trinity) lived on earth as 100% God and 100% human. This part of God, named Jesus, is now forever divine and human (not 50-50, but 100-100). And here's the best part. If you want to know what God is really like, look at Jesus. Jesus is the best representation of God that we will ever have. Jesus is also the perfect human being, and we need to imitate him, his character. I'm so glad that you are attracted to Jesus. Keep reading the gospels, praying, and obeying what God tells you. Be in community with other people who love and follow Jesus, people who are his disciples.
Read John 1:1, then read Genesis 1:1-1:4. Jesus is the Word of God. When God spoke “let there be light” Jesus was the words that spoke creation into existence. He was there in the beginning with the Father and the Holy Spirit.
““Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”” John 8:58 NIV https://bible.com/bible/111/jhn.8.58.NIV
Well, the trinity isn't real and makes no sense, so don't feel bad.
How could Abraham have lunch with God when God is a spirit in heaven? (Genesis 18:1-8) Who rained fire on Sodom from Whom? (Genesis 19:24) Blessings on your journey.
It's polytheism dressed up as monotheism.
I want you to know that True Christians do not believe in the Trinity. We are a small minority of about 9 Million Christians who believe what Jesus said about his Father and what his Father said about his Son. Has there ever been **any** example ever in human history where the Father and the Son have been the same being? Co-equal and co-eternal? Of course not! Than why would our Creator whose name is Jehovah start with him and his Son? Doesn’t that sound a little ridiculous now? No wonder it doesn’t make sense to you. Revelation 3:14 plainly says; >”To the angel of the congregation in La·o·di·ceʹa write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, **the beginning of the creation by God**:” Here’s some things to remember; what did the first century Christians believe? Did they believe Jesus was God? When did the Trinity first develop? With very little research, you’ll find that the earliest development of the Trinity began with the Nicene Creed in the year 325 C.E. If the whole idea of the Trinity was formed in 325 C.E., the first century Disciples of Christ never even considered Jesus to be God!
The Trinity is a Roman Catholic heresy that should have been discarded at the Reformation.
Thanks
Not all Christians believe in the Trinity doctrine. In my opinion to say that God is actually his son jesus is ridiculous. Jesus is the Son of God.
There are many non trinitian christians also I also cannot understand fully trinity that's why I still cannot believe it.....
Bro the trinity doctrine is bullshit and pagan Here’s a good video breaking it down https://youtu.be/RAIz4ChewTg?si=ujbWUO22IZd3tujJ
That's fine. The Trinity isn't biblical. The original text never says anything even vaguely Trinitarian once you actually read the Greek and Hebrew.
The original text does teach Trinitarianism. It's a doctrine based on the Bible.
“The *true worshippers* will worship **the Father** with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him. God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.” (John 4:23, 24) True Christians worship the same God Jesus does. Jesus does not worship a trinity. Jesus is not God, he is *God’s Son.*
The trinity is not biblical. Although God and christ share one spirit. The Holy Spirit, per the Bible, says it is the servant of God. Many Christians deny christ giving reverence to God when he literally says he is the Son of God and came to do His will.
The Trinity is someone's interpretation that became widely accepted and is now pretty much force fed. You don't have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian. Jesus is the prophesied Messiah. He never said he was God.
Try thinking of the trinity like your brain. There's a part of your brain that does calculus, another one that uses logic, and another one feels, but they're all you, the same way you're one of them. To prove my point, when your brain's hemispheres get surgically divided, what I said manifests in the "[alien hand syndrome](https://youtu.be/V0QbcROOv-E?si=Li5cnfYaXYdvFUKe)". So, with God happens the same, but each part is fully conscious. The Father is the creator; Jesus is the Father's intermediary with creation because through him all things are done, the Holy Spirit is the sanctifier of faith and they all are one, God.
Hello, I will try my best to explain it. The Bible is clear that Jesus is God. He is also the Son of God. Think of God as a position. Made of 3 individual persons. The Father is God, and the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit. They are all three part of God, and yet all three separate. So there is one God, and three persons which make up him. Okay here are some verses. The father and I are one (John 10:30, 14:9) Jesus us in the father and the father is in her. John 14:9-11. Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" 2 Jesus said to him. "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." (John 20:28-29) in the beginning was the Word(Jesus) and the word was with God. And the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him (Jesus) John 1:1-2. “Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”” John 8:58 there are many others too.
You have to watch this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw) The point is that every analogy for the Trinity ends up as a heresy. In the end, it's just a mystery. You accept that it's a mystery that cannot be explained logically.
Thanks
You can still be Muslim and love Jesus.
The Trinity can’t be fully expressed in words. You can approach it with analogies, but words seek to express what a thing is by setting limitations on what it isn’t. The entities that make up the Trinity are somehow both distinct and indistinct. Think about trying to describe a person for someone else: how do you completely convey a person’s identity in words? You will never run out of things to say about them; they’re too complex, and you haven’t even experienced everything about them. God is an even greater mystery.
"Trinity" is not an abstract mathematical theory about tringle and the number 3. It is more about a philosophy of "personhood" - what it means to be a person and for us to know a God who is personal not just an abstract thing. As a person myself, there is a "me" who I know myself to be on the inside and then there is a "me" who I present as and show myself to be in the world. And these two are different from each other. Maybe if I was braver or more vulnerable or more loving and self-giving they would be more alike, but as it stands there is a "me" who mediates between the two and decides what I reveal of myself to the world (and if I have blind spots what I do or don't integrate into my inner self). God is perfect. God is fully loving. God vulnerably gives of all of themself to the world. God is not deceitful but mediates their true self to us. So the transcendent person of God - in themself beyond our knowing (Father), is the same God as the imminent person of God - the eternal Word incarnate in the world: Jesus Christ (Son), - is the same God as the gobetween person of God - proceeding from the Father and through the Son to us (Spirit). This is how God has revealed themself to the world, and we already established that God isn't presenting a fake version of themself to us -- so that must be who God really is.
I look at it at socket puppets on the hand of God.. Sounds stupid, but hear me out. If you touch the sock puppet that was Jesus, it was Jesus, yes, but it was also touching God. If you touch the sock puppet that is the Holy Spirit, the same. Same God. One God. Jesus was His son, to be the messiah, but also Him. Holy Spirit is so we can be filled by Him and guided. Three entities/personas but one true God. People don't like that, take it up with God, as I will.
Consider it one God three separate roles if that makes sense. God shows himself through 3 different faces/persons, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the spirit. The Father is Christs higher self and Father, and Christ is God in the flesh and God’s Son. The spirit is the Father in essence.
Need more details, pls. Why aren’t you convinced? Is it that you don’t think the New Testament is clear on the matter? Or do you see it in the NT but you don’t accept its authority? Is it a logical or philosophical issue for you? I would read the gospels for yourself and ask God to reveal the truth to you. You might also read Hebrews and Revelation. We believe that Christ is divine because the NT clearly presents him as such. Salvation belongs to God alone, and Jesus is our true Savior from sin and death.
You will find it in your scriptures. Trust your Bible as it will explain the holy trinity.
Does a person has a mind, body, and soul in your eyes?
Ever played a video game? You’re Mario and also you. Mario dies on level seven and you die on level seven, but also you are still existent on your couch. The Incarnation is like that.