Trinity the central dogma of almost every Christian denomination

[Anonymous]

Trinity is a central dogma in most Christian denominations, as many consider it necessary to accept this dogma to believe in Jesus as Christ.

However the word Trinity does not appear in the Bible and the classic wording was first formulated by Tertullian from Carthage about 200 AD (God is one substance and three persons). The three persons in the Trinity are the Father (Jehovah or Yahweh), the Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit (God’s active force). The word Trinity was first used by Theophilus of Antioch in around 180 AD and became a crucial theme during the formation of the Catholic Church, for example, in relation to the conflict between the Alexandrian and Antioch theological schools, and various "heretics" like the Arians, the Modalists and the Macedonian heresy. The dogma is a further development of various Neoplatonic theories, especially the supreme god's hypostatic nature and Plato's original interim concept. The Catholics however, did not perceive the substance as evil and could incorporate other philosophical schools to help its popularity.

It was fully formulated and established as a dogma in the Nicean creed of 325 AD by Constantine.

When Constantine became the ruler of the Roman Empire, those who identified themselves as Christians were divided in the question of the relationship between God and Christ. To settle the matter, Constantine summoned church leaders to a meeting in Nicaea. It wasn't because he was interested in what was biblical correct or wrong, but he didn't want religion to divide his kingdom.

The bishops constantly asked to reach a unanimous decision but failed. Then he came up with the suggestion that the participants at the meeting should adhere to the unclear formulation that Jesus was "of the same being" (homoousios) as the Father. This unbiblical, Greek philosophical expression formed the basis of the Trinity, which was later clarified in the Church's creeds. Indeed, at the end of the fourth century, the Trinity doctrine had, to a large extent, been given the form it has today, also regarding the so-called third part of the Godhead, the Holy Ghost.

Recommended readings on the subject could be the works by Augustine of Hippo, Hilarius of Poitiers, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, and Joseph Priestley.

The trinity dogma is unbiblical in its origin, and not supported by the scriptures. Jesus, who according to the dogma of the trinity is part of the trinity, was a Jew, but Judaism does not recognize the Trinity. The holy spirit is the working hand of God (Jehovah) and is not a person. The scriptures defined Jesus as the son of God (you can't be both the father and the son to yourself can you!!!), he is also defined as the firstborn of all creation. Meaning the first, God the Father (Jehovah), ever created.

Still, Jesus is part of the creation, not the creator, big diffrence.

Trinity is not mentioned once in the Bible, Jesus is not quoted as the Almighty God even once. On the contrary, he always refers to the Father, he does this on several occasions. The first Christians worshiped Jehovah not Jesus, and it took almost 100 years to even enter Christianity.

Trinity's of deities are known from pre-Christian religions in Babylon, Assyria, Egypt and are today found in Hinduism as well.

All the scriptures usually used to argument for the Trinity, can be refuted easily. However this take is too long as it is, so I’ll restrain myself to this, as it is.

[Anonymous]

GOD is above the dome
I don't waste my time over complicating anything anymore

[AnArmAndALeg]

A little funny just how wrong you are. I don’t believe in the trinity as the concept the “church” teaches, but a lot of your assertions about Jesus and the Bible are ignorant. Let’s just go down the line.

The main scripture, just to give it to you, that people use for the trinity is
1 John 5:7-8 -“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
‭
I’m not going to argue that, Because I don’t care, but you can’t have an article about the trinity and not bring this up. Please, I won’t you to thoroughly go through this.

Secondly, you mentioned Judaism like they know anything. They don’t even follow the Bible, and I am talking about the law and the Old Testament. Jewish people have some made up oral law. If anything has no biblical basis, it’s that. They do things which are in direct opposition to what is actually written in the Bible. So to even bring Judaism up like they have any weight is wrong.

Now the third part, and the most outlandish claim you put was how Jesus wasn’t God, and that he isn’t the creator. That’s literally so dumb, I’m almost speechless. I’m going to just give you scriptures, please explain these away. Rachel of them alone is enough to refute your retarded statement.

John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”
‭‭
The subject here is the word, it says that the Word is God, and that he created all things. Who is the word?

[AnArmAndALeg]

John1:14-15 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me; for he was before me.”
‭‭
Jesus Christ. The Word is Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is God. He created all things. Please explain this scripture if I’m wrong.

Colossians 1: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist: and he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence.”
‭‭
Funnily enough, you mentioned this scripture. Do you see how the subject is Jesus Christ and never changes. It tells you clearly he made everything. If I’m wrong, please explain how.

Hebrews 1:1-2 “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;”
‭‭
By whom also he made the worlds. If I’m wrong, explain how.

[AnArmAndALeg]

This is a few scriptures which plainly tell you who created everything. Now there are way way more that shows the divinity of Jesus Christ. I’ll just give three.

Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
‭
Do I even have to explain? Here is Jesus being quoted as the Mighty God.

Psalms 110:1 “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”
‭
Is this not clear. If I’m wrong explain it. Who was David talking to? He’s king, who is his Lord, and who is that Lord’s Lord.

This was quoted in Hebrews first chapter.

You make statements like you know what you are talking about, but you clearly never opened the Bible.

[myTake Owner]

No, 1 John 5:7-8 will depend heavily on the translation used, and as I said I skipped the whole scripture part based on length.

1 John 5:7-8 American Standard Version (ASV)

7 And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one.

1 John 5:7-8 Christian Standard Bible (CSB)
7 For there are three that testify:[a] 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood—and these three are in agreement.

1 John 5:7-8 Darby Translation (DARBY)

7 For they that bear witness are three:
8 the Spirit, and the water, and the blood; and the three agree in one.

There is no basis for saying "and these three are one", it does, however, say "and these three agree in one" as in "three are in agreement".

When I Judaism, I as it as what Jesus believe and what he preached. not what someone 1009+ years later came up with for political reasons.

John 1:1-3 doesn't speak of the holy sprite or Jehovah, but only the word. Jesus is called the word, so it has to be ham alone.

[myTake Owner]

The Coptic language was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. Regarding the earliest Coptic translations of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: “Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century C. E., the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses.”

The Sahidic Coptic text is especially interesting for two reasons. First, as indicated above, it reflects an understanding of Scripture dating from before the fourth century, which was when the Trinity became official doctrine. Second, Coptic grammar is relatively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest translations were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic, however, does. Moreover, scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.”

Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part of John 1:1. Thus, when rendered into modern English, the translation reads: “And the Word was a god.” Evidently, those ancient translators realized that John’s words recorded at John 1:1 did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was a god, not Almighty God.

The rest of the scripture bears witness to this as well. The old testament doesn't mention Jesus at all, only Jehovah, why was Jesus and the hole sprit never mentioned when they are God?

[myTake Owner]

Jesus himself said in John 4:23;

American Standard Version

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth: for such doth the Father seek to be his worshippers.

Why only worship the Father? Why not Jesus, and why not the holy spirit?

John 17:3 Modern English Version

3 This is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.

Here Jesus makes it clear, God send Jesus Christ, meaning two different individuals.

John 5:18-19 Modern English Version

18 So the Jews sought even more to kill Him, because He not only had broken the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
The Authority of the Son
19 Then Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do. For whatever He does, likewise the Son does.

Here Jesus made it clear, himself (the Son) do nothing of Himself because his the Son, not the Father.

In Matthew 4:10 we read;

Modern English Version

10 Then Jesus said to him, “Get away from here, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve.’”

It's a reference to Deuteronomy 6:13, where JHVH is used.

Are Jehovah and Jesus the same, no they are not, even the Trinity doctrine recognizes this.

Therefore it's Bible-based to say, you shall worship Jevjoah your God and him only, not Jesus or the holy spirit.

Besides if John 1:1 were interpreted to mean Jesus was himself God Almighty, it would contradict the preceding statement, “the Word was with God.” Someone who is “with” another person cannot be the same as that other person. Many Bible translations thus draw a distinction, making clear that the Word was not the God Almighty. For example, a sampling of Bible translations say the following: “The Word was a God,” “a god was the Word,” and “the Word was divine.”

[myTake Owner]

Bible verses that in the Greek language have a construction similar to that of John 1:1 use the expression “a god.” For example, when referring to Herod Agrippa I, the crowds shouted: ‘It is a god speaking.’ And when Paul survived a bite by a poisonous snake, the people said: “He is a god.” (Acts 12:22; 28:3-6) It is in harmony with both Greek grammar and Bible teaching to speak of the Word as, not God, but “a god.”​

Jesus is the Son of God, and he can't be his own son.

Jesus told Mary Magdalene: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17).

Jesus is a god in the sense of being divine or the imaged of God (2 Corinthians 4:4), but he is not God the Father or Jehovah.

Nor is the hole spirit said to be a god anyway, where is the hole spirit said to be a god?

Satan is also called a god (2 Corinthians 4:4), the god of this world to be exact. Yet he is still not the almighty God.

We need to make the distinction between what the Bible scribe as Jehovah the Almighty God, and the other god's.

At best it would be duality and not a trinity if anything. Yet still, the Bible makes it clear, Jesus is not the equal of Jehovah, he himself worshiped Jewvhoah and called him Father. He did this for a reason.

All other scriptures in favor of Trinity, can be refuted similarly.

[AnArmAndALeg]

Okay it’s funny how you ignored most of my arguments and spent so much time on something I said I didn’t care about. I never said that they weren’t separate I just said you have to approach the scripture if you are going to make an argument. The Bible is the ultimate authority to anybody you would be arguing to so that’s the only thing that would matter. Not the external facts you were bringing up.

Also, whatever your saying about John1:1 is just wrong. I went there to show how Jesus was God, and how he created everything, not to show that Jesus and The father were the same. Please read what I right. All the other scripture you confidently left out which were apart of my main argument also affirms this. God the father, and God the son, Jesus Christ.

Finally, and I’m sure this is the only point your going to respond to, I don’t use other translations for the Bible, regardless of what people say about it’s validity, and they even still can’t agree on that.
Most translations don’t make sense at all when you try to match common scriptures in the Bible, or the flow of the verses.

Until someone can convince me that they know the Bible themselves I’m not going to listen to what they have to say in choice of translations. What makes you so confident in the translations your using that you can say others are wrong?

But ignore that last part and address my other points.

[myTake Owner]

@AnArmAndALeg
What I said about John1:1 is provable right. Simply saying so doesn't prove anything.
The Bible doesn't say God is a trinity. It talks about many Gods, but only Jehovah is defined as the almighty God and he is the one and only we should worship. This is the point, then it doesn't matter if Jesus is a God or not, he is not Jehovah the Almighty God the creator.
Jesus is a creation, major difference, although to be fair Jesus did create everything else, but he is still a creation and not eternal, unlike his eternal Father.
Show me the scriptures saying the holy sprite is a person and is the almighty God, show me the scripture saying Jesus is the almighty God, only JHVA is defined as the almighty God.
Showed me the scripture defining trinity, simply saying Jesus is a God and yet accepting he and Jehovah are two separate Gods but still, only God, is simply illogical (a duality at best not a trinity), and not stated in the bible.
All the rest outside the scriptures arguments is to provide a better understanding of the scriptures, so ignoring it, is to keep yourself blind - defending a dogma, clearly not Bible-based.
No translation is perfect, therefore you need to see several translations or being able to read the originals. Simply to pick a translation that support your dogma, doesn't prove anything except your Bible then becomes a selected one. Your own translation, so to speak.
Most translations don’t make sense when you try to force an unbiblical dogma on it.
I know the bible very well, and I use many translations, incl. KJV. I often validate scripture by using two or tree versions. For instance most versions don’t use the name Jehovah at all, only Lord, other translates uses it a bit, but only one uses it consistently. But since Jehovah witnesses bible translation is the only one uses it consistently, then the problem become most people claim it to be a bad translation. So, use of multiply translations becomes paramount.

[myTake Owner]

Those incising on using only one translation like KJV, is dogmatic and not really interested in the truth, based on my experiences. Especially since KJV, is filled to doctrinal support since it’s based on “Bishops’ Bible” because King James insisted on it. So it’s not impartial or free of doctrinal influences.
We agree that Jesus is the word, and the Son of God. I can agree that some angels are defined as Gods, both Jesus and Satan is.
But nowhere does the bible say the hole sprite is a God. Nor it is supported by anything. Nor does it say Jehovah and Jesus are equal, or that Jesus is the almighty God. And ALL of it has to be so, for the trinity to be true.
Non of the scriptures you used proves trinity, but everything else in the bible proves it to be false. If trinity was true, then it’s be integrated in the old testament as well. The holy sprite would be mentioned as a God and Jesus would be mentioned as a God.
Jesus would not have said the Father is greater than me, unless it was so, or is Jesus lying?

John 14:28 Common English Bible
“28 You have heard me tell you, ‘I’m going away and returning to you.’ If you loved me, you would be happy that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than me.”
Jesus made it clear in 1 Tim. 2:5 that there is ONE/1/UNO God , and he (Jesus) is the mediator.
1 Timothy 2:5 Common English Bible
“5 There is one God and one mediator between God and humanity, the human Christ Jesus”

If Jesus was equal to Jehovah, even after his resurrection, then Mark 13:32 would be wrong?
Mark 13:32 Common English Bible
“32 “But nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the angels in heaven and not the Son. Only the Father knows.”
Of course, that would not be the case if Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were coequal, comprising one Godhead. And if, as some suggest, the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, the question remains, Why did the Holy Spirit not know?

[myTake Owner]

Matthew 20:23 Common English Bible
“23 He said to them, “You will drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left hand isn’t mine to give. It belongs to those for whom my Father prepared it.””
Aging here Jesus makes it clear, the Father has authority over him, the Father prepares who sits on Jesus my right or left hand, not Jesus himself.
1 Corinthians 11:3 Common English Bible
“3 Now I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. “
Again here we read, the head of Christ is God. Jesus has God as head, he isn't God or equal to God.
The Hebrew word Shad·daiʹ and the Greek word Pan·to·kraʹtor are both translated “Almighty” Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.
1 Corinthians 8:5-6 Common English Bible
“5 Granted, there are so-called “gods,” in heaven and on the earth, as there are many gods and many lords. 6 However, for us believers,
There is one God the Father.
All things come from him, and we belong to him.
And there is one Lord Jesus Christ.
All things exist through him, and we live through him”
Again There is one God the Father, ONE. And there is one Lord Jesus Christ. God and Lord is not the same or equal.

[myTake Owner]

Its not just my claims:
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century. . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

[myTake Owner]

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B. C. E.] conception of the divine trinity. . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.”—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.
John L. McKenzie, S. J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.”—(New York, 1965), p. 899.

[myTake Owner]

In 1:6 You read; "And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth".
So the Spirit is the truth, not God.

"8 the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."
In agreement does not mean the same, you and I can be in agreement, but it doesn't make us the same person.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

What your saying is half true in fact the Dogma is a rip off from the Celtic Irish the Morrigan who is three separate beings ”mother, maiden crone" that has existed long before the rise of that whole religion in fact when the was here in the UK, or midevil Britain were Ireland was only 2 hours in boat. Simply look up the triple Goddess were the Dogma was taken and changed it roots hence why the bible doesn’t want too put in the book as they wanted to wipe out paganism from history. Many things were taken from pagans Christmas, Halloween, Easter the triple goddess, and many symbols as well. In history new evidence has proven that Jesus Christ wasn’t a prophet he was a rebel fighting the Romans hence why he got crucified and was born in February not December, Christmas is Yule and Santa is Odin.

[myTake Owner]

The Romans didn't take much inspiration in Celtic religion, Trinity of Gods is much older and onions back in ancient Babylon.
Both Roman and Greek religion have inspiration from Babylonian religion, and it's fair to say Christianity took it's inspiration from Roman and Greek religions, with in turn was inspired by Babylonian religion.

And yes, outside the Bible, there is no evidence of Jesus Christ's miracles. His birthday is unknown, hence we can say if it's February or not, however, evidence indicates sometime in the summer months, so nither February nor December.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

Then i suggest you do more research as what you say is half true, the Old Norse (vikings, Heathens) had no history with such things and the Celtic Irish worshipped a trinity of Gods before the Romans came to Ireland her name the morrigan is the triple Goddess, now considering the Romans conquered medieval pagan Britannia they also conquered Scotland and northen Irland, now when they left the newly formed UK (or thrown out if you will) they brought Christian faith our way as they already had the Jewish at the time under lock and key. The new evidence (which i recommend you look at) suggests Jesus was born in February not December it also suggest the reason he was crified is because he was a fighting to over throw the Romans and was caught. They did indeed tkae many things from the Pagans, WIccans and witches of the time simply becasue Christmas is Yule *which is Viknig) even the story of Jesus being resurrected is taken from Ostara the Goddess of the dawn who was said to bring the sunrise and her symbol is a white rabbit and she was said to be able to resurrect the dead she liked chocolate and the Egg was again used in worship to her, Halloween is samhien look it up is Celtic Irish, the list does go on i suggest you stop listening to where ever you get your information is seems to be confusing you.

[myTake Owner]

Romans religion was well established and formed, long before they ever came to the British Isles.

I suggest you do more research, before making such claims as you do.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

The clams i make are founded by fact so they are correct, i never said they took inspiration i simply said the Christians stole from the pagans and judging from what they like to say is pagan the Romans fall into that, suggest reading what i actually said.
Your half right is what i kept saying the Christians took form the Celtic Mother, maiden, crone and changed it to Father, sun and holy spirit that is histrionically correct, it is called the Tripple Goddess and has nothing to do with Romans.

[myTake Owner]

Link to documentation proving it or it simply claims!

[Alfadhirhaiti]

Why should I do the work for you go and look on google let’s be honest that is were we all get our imfomation, there fore one could clam your opinion om the matter is also a google scratch away so get off your high horse your not travelling the world looking at ancient scrolls and tablets, your doing second hand research which a person opinion based on what they look at and coming up with theories. History is written by the victors so there fore I operate on everything I see on google could be wrong and go from site to site comparing all the imfomation and taking away the parts that different whilst keeping those that are the same, that takes years not weeks or months but years. Therefore your half true I happen to have the parts that also true and for that your welcome

[myTake Owner]

Then it's just empty claims, your personal beliefs.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

Correct supported by history.

[myTake Owner]

It's not supported by history, that's why if you don't prove it, it simply claims.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

And so your fingers are broken and you push and bully me to your work for you.
Get off this site, load up Google, tripe into google "the triple Goddess" why on earth do you expect me to "prove" anything just look it up and see for self or is this a man thing? To push the female into proving her historically accurate "claims"

I mean come on it isn’t rocket science is it? In fact it iquite simple LOAD UP GOOGLE AND TYPE THE TRIPPLE GODDESS and done p (hopefully you now get the point am making do it yourself)

[myTake Owner]

It's your claims, hence why it up to YOU to prove it.

I don't have to disprove your claims, you have to prove them.

[Alfadhirhaiti]

No I don’t have to hold your hand in order to defend myself.
In fact I was coming from you looking at it with your own eyes and finding it yourself with out me cherry picking the sites in fact in terms of you making up your own mind I always found doing the reasearch yourself and looking at everything yourself , infact I find it better than someone using specific sites and facts.

Aside from that I know what I say to be the true so I feel no need to convince you of anything and I won’t allow you to bully me into sending you the proof, here in the UK when I state to others they always find it fair and look it up at the own time not bulling others in presenting facts. bye so we are clear am assuming your from the USA because your attitude is classic American.

[myTake Owner]

I just don't believe you nor do I have any reason to, all evidence points to the contrary.

I am not American though, but from the union, you are about to leave.

[Under_Maps_OF_twigs]

The concept of the trinity is in the Bible. However, many words are not in the Bible but it's concept it. Rapture is not in the Bible but there will be a catching away in the clouds is not metaphorical speech. Some things are in the literal.

I disagree with people who claim trinity is a false teaching.

www.biblestudytools.com/.../

Good luck explaining away over 20 verses teaching it.

The word trinity comes from "tri" meaning three and "unity" meaning one. God is three distinct individuals - God the Father, the Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit - in one true God.

[myTake Owner]

All refutable based on the theological concept in the entire Bible, some have already been addressed in the response to AnArmAndALeg.

The historical background should be considered as well.

All in all, there is no bases for a trinity. At best a duality, but not even the equality of Jesus and Jehovah can be defended Biblically.

It's doctrinal without basis in real history or the scriptures - provided they are read in its entirety and interpreted to fit at fixed doctrine.

Where is Jesus or the holy spirit ever mentioned in the old testament as God?

[Under_Maps_OF_twigs]

The Bible clearly says that God, Jesus and Holy Ghost are part of the Godhead.

I've read and watched videos who claimed the trinity is a false teaching but it's not. They just have a bad concept of what it means.

[myTake Owner]

Where does the Bible says that Jehovah, Jesus and Holy Ghost are part of a Godhead?

[Under_Maps_OF_twigs]

christianity.net.au/.../are_father_son_and_holy_spirit_one_or_three

[myTake Owner]

So it doesn't say so, just as I said it didn't :)

[Under_Maps_OF_twigs]

If you think that but it's not.

[myTake Owner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kHoEDA-Xw4

[Sabretooth]

Mark 11:29
Jesus said to them: “I will ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Matthew 26:39
And going a little way forward, he fell facedown, praying: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will.”

Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.
John 6:38
for I have come down from heaven to do, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me.

[genericname85]

for some reason thiss bullshit is only taught in the usa. i'm an atheist but i grew up a christian and i nor anybody else here ever thinks that. maybe this is an issue with the English translation of the book.

[myTake Owner]

Actually is official doctrine used for almost 2000m years. It's completely incomprehensible, so it does require blind faith to believe in it.

[genericname85]

it is contradictory in many places but it's one thing do fail and understand something that is actually contradictory than completely missreading something that is written in the book in clear text without contradictions xD

it is comprehensible if you read it the right way. if you read it with the fact in mind that is intended to createa believe in a diety at the cost of rationality, it actually does make a lot of sense and you can have a good laugh at the different autors making up their own bullshit and openly even struggeling for having their version of the story be the better one xD

there are even stories compeltely made up about prophecies being fullfilled, just because some moron earlier in the book made a prophecy and they couldn't suffer it not to be fullfilled so they rather had it fulfilled in the story than the story actually making sense.

[myTake Owner]

So true :)

[jacquesvol]

Unitarians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarianism
and Arianists : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism

do NOT accept Trinity

Unitarians and Trinitarians fought a bloody battle for hundreds of years, one of them leading to a Crusade against Arianism.

[jacquesvol]

But only the worldly power of the Vatican settled the matter. They couldn't convince each other.

[jacquesvol]

Sorry, wrong image. But the wall around Trinitarianism still exists...

[jacquesvol]

[myTake Owner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9WRO0IU1Mg

[Liam_Hayden]

Refuted easily? In Scripture, the Father is identified as God, the Spirit is identified as God, the Son is identified as God, and yet there is only one God so the "a god" malarkey doesn't work, because then you would have multiple real Gods. I realize JW's and like groups tend to be anti-intellectual, but an absolute infinite that expresses as three distinct persons in finite space time is not a problem at all mathematically.

[myTake Owner]

Satan is called a God too, and the Spirit is not identified as a person but as a force.

I have addressed most scriptures in my reply to AnArmAndALeg, but knowing the history and background of Trinity should at least raise an alert. Trinity is the most anti-intellectual idea if any. And although JW's are totalitarian and have some unbiblical doctrines as well, they are right about Trinity.
Jesus is not finite in time since he has a beginning, being God's (Jehovah's) first-born creation. Jesus doesn't know what Jehovah's know and Jehovah is great than Jesus.

See the scriptures in my reply to AnArmAndALeg.

[House5plusforth]

1945 Trinity project / Atom bomb

[myTake Owner]

@House5plusforth At least the Trinity project was real :)

[myTake Owner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kHoEDA-Xw4

[John_Doesnt]

And what passage in the bible says the word "trinity"?

[myTake Owner]

Non, but that is not the key. The key is, the very concept doesn't show in the Bible.

[HereIbe]

Dear moron: The Trinity is NOT the central dogma of Christianity. The central dogma is that Christ was incarnated, being fully God and becoming fully human, and that His incrnation, VOLUNTARY acceptance of human frailty up to death, AND resurrection, has made a way for humanity to return to the paradaisical state.

[Phanta]

You are very incorrect, in that Trinitarianism was and is the original understanding of Christianity. Therefore it is true Christianity, and anyone who denies the Trinity is not a Christian. See my dissertation on the Trinity: Chapter VII (7) of my website: www.thezap.net

[myTake Owner]

see my response to AnArmAndALeg.

[myTake Owner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kHoEDA-Xw4

[reptocarl]

Jesus said “the way to my father is through me”
Jesus said “if you blaspheme the Holy Spirit you will not be forgiven in this lifetime or the next”

[myTake Owner]

Mark 3:28-29 Easy-to-Read Version
"28 “I want you to know that people can be forgiven for all the sinful things they do. They can even be forgiven for the bad things they say against God. 29 But anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. They will always be guilty of that sin.”"

Doesn't prove the Holy Spirit to be a person, entity or God. Doesn't prove equality with God the Father or even the Son."

John 14:6 Easy-to-Read Version
"6 Jesus answered, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. The only way to the Father is through me."

Again proves the difference between Jesus and Jehovah as the Almighty God.

Doesn't support the Trinity in any meaningful way.

[reptocarl]

I’m not saying it does. All I’m saying is Jesus points out a distinction of both a Father and Holy Spirit

[myTake Owner]

Indeed he did.

[AbleLearner]

The Greatest Conceivable Being can co-exist as an infinite number of "persons", so the notion of the Trinity is incorrect.

[es20490446e]

The people that wrote Catholicism just thought that three would look cool.

[House5plusforth]

that's not funny but that's good don't do it

[jimmy2]

I am a man. I am married. I am a dad. 3 in one whats so hard

[myTake Owner]

Trinity says 3 different individuals/persons, not different roles.

I more like:

Your father, you and electricity are all the same and yet different. Compleat incomprehensible nonsense.

[Nadim171]

Jesus is God is the father is the holy spirit. It's just different forms of God to help us understand him. But God doesn't really have a shape

[myTake Owner]

see my response to AnArmAndALeg.

[myTake Owner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kHoEDA-Xw4

[Marti434]

Interesting read thanks for sharing!

[Secretgardenblood]

Good take

[Anonymous]

Nice mytake