on the trinity

drew sagan

I was just wondering what the opinions those on this board regarding this topic. I know some have moved towards more orthodox theology, others have not. Curious as to what the opinions are of this. Do you feel it is an essential doctrine? Are you not a Christian without it? Is it the foundation of Christian faith? Wondering what you think.

lovelylil

Hi Drew,

My opinion is that God and Jesus are two seperate people but bound together by Holy Spirit which is God's power or essence, for lack of a better work. I believe the Spirit is more than an "active force" like electricity but is not a person that can think and speak on its own.

All bible "evidence" given by those who claim that the spirit does speak - clearly is not literal but figuratively when you read the text in its context. The bible writers had to convey what the spirit is and likened it to things we can understand such as wind, a dove, fire - or personified it by calling it a he or him. There are many examples of the personafying things in the bible that we KNOW are not literal people and I feel this is one example. It is one thing I agree with the WT on. Many bible texts identify the spirit as the "spirit of God" or "spirit of Jesus" thus showing that the spirit acts in unison with them but not as a seperate entity of its own. Maybe one or two scriptures seem to show otherwise but must be read in their complete context.

NO - I do not believe that believing the trinity doctrine is essential to our salvation. Believing in Jesus Christ and that he is the divine son of God is but nothing else is required.

I would attend any church that teaches the trinity or others that do not. It simply does not matter. Lilly

serendipity

Here's a bump for you Drew.

I still retain the JW belief on the Trinity. I believe a person is a Christian if they try to follow Christ's teachings. I'm still undecided as to whether it's an essential doctrine. I wish that the scriptures were clear-cut on this.

XJW4EVR

While there is no explicit scripture on the doctrine of the Trinity, I do believe that the implicit scriptures that refer to the Christian diety being a Trinity are clear and compeling.

I do believe that it is an essential orthodox doctrine. Orthodox being the key. The label is a rubberband word that can be stretched to fit a number of different doctrines.

In Romans, Paul says that there are two things that designate one a Christian, belief the Jesus rose from the dead and confession of Jesus as LORD. He quotes from Joel to show the Roman Jews he was writing to show them exactly who he met.

These two doctrines are Christianity distilled down to the irreducable minimum. Which makes sense when you think about how many cults & sects deny one, the other or both.

nutter

There are three ways to view the humble peanut. And not one of them would be correct. So why bother and just enjoy the snack. If you have a struggle with this, why not buy a pack of ready salted ones tomorrow and see for yourself. Or, you could actually do some research for yourself. Like find out if the Romans ate peanuts, or just invented the whole thing. The nutter

drew sagan

An interesting thing I have been reading regarding this topic has to do with John 1:1 and if it even refers to Jesus at all. It is said by some that 'Logos' known by many as 'the Word' can actually be translated as meaning Gods wisdom and purpose. It is also said that the 'him' translated in this scripture (strongs #846. autos (ow-tos') can also be translated a number of differant ways including 'it'. With this concept in mind the scripture could actually read:

In the beginning was the purpose, and the purpose was with God, and the purpose was divine. It was with God in the beginning. Through it all things were made; without it nothing was made that has been made. In it was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood[a] it.

Interesting stuff, not without it's complexities but still very interesting.

bebu

Just a quick comment about the Word and Wisdom... I find it hard to think of a time when God did not have wisdom. Or, that God was not expressing himself ('speaking'). I think of the Word/Light metaphors as examples of how God reveals/expresses Himself. My own words reveal and express who I am, for example.

I have written before that I think that the trinity is a correct doctrine, but I believe that grace extends to those who love God even if they have some incorrect doctrines (which would be all of us, I suspect!). So having purity of doctrine is inferior to practicing the 2 laws Jesus gave, imo.

bebu

drew sagan

So having purity of doctrine is inferior to practicing the 2 laws Jesus gave, imo.

I agree, and that's why I started this thread. It's not that I'm against the teaching of the trinity, or feel that it is just a 'pagan' doctrine. By no means. But it is the product of theology, not straight scripture. Which means there will allways be arguements regarding it. What bothers me the most is people who take a doctrine and then judge others by their acceptance or denial of it, and the trinity is used more often than most in this regard.
I also would like to add something in regards the interpretaiton I was talking about in my post above. When going over the info on this particular interpretation I wondered to myself why the Watchtower society has never taken such a position. It seems much eaiser to make this arguement than to challenge the insertion of the word 'a' to make the scripture say 'a god'. Then I realized that to do so would challenge so many other points in their theology.
To be quite honest I never truely bought into the 'God created everything through his most powerful angel' idea, something about it never seemed right to me.

NowImFree

Hi Drew,

I now believe because I could not explain all the parallels between Yahweh of the old testament and Jesus of the new testament without the trinity. It was the only way I could resolve the fact that Yahweh said in the old testament that he is the only Savior and the only God, no God before him or after him. He also said every knee would bow before him and that there would be One Lord. These are in Isaiah. Then in Philippians it says every knee will bow before Jesus and confess that he is Lord to the glory of the father. In the old testament, Yahweh said he would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. In the new testament, it is Jesus that is betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. In Isaiah, Yahweh says he is the First and the Last, in Revelation the first chapter and the last chapter, Jesus says he is the First and the Last. In Acts, Ananias is accused of lying to the Holy Spirit, then farther down in the passage, it says he lied to God. How can you lie to something that is only an active force? Why would the new testament say we need to be baptized in the NAME (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? There are tons of other scripture connections I found which made me believe the trinity is in fact the only explanation that resolved it for me. That God has shown himself in 3 ways or manifestations all with different functions for the purpose of salvation. It confused me at first but now it doesn't so much anymore. I also believe God is mysterious and isn't like anything we have ever seen or experienced. We only really understand what we have already seen.

I compare it to someone being born blind and never being able to experience sight. I can't imagine trying to explain color to them or trying to explain what having sight is like, it would be impossible. Same with hearing. We only understand based on what we have already seen or experienced.

Sorry to go on but I find this subject fascinating. Especially since I was raised a JW and was the biggest one to walk around and say the trinity was nuts and made no sense. And now I totally believe it.

Thanks for asking,

NowImfree

barry

I beleive as 99% of christians beleive that christian doctrine is developed.

The protestant doctrine of righeousness by faith was only developed at the time of the reformation and many times the christian church only looks at a doctrine when a heracy pops up. You cant asnwer a question before its asked.

The same applies to the trinity doctrine hundreds of baptisimal formalia in th efirst few centries had the central theme as the trinity the nicean creed is taken from the creed of ceasarear. Arius was a Jonny come lately is the developement of the doctrine.

I dont beleive the doctrine is depentant on salvation in factr some in the church I attend dont beleive the trinity but they are in the minority.

on the trinity

Share this