Trinitarians Godheadians, Can Their Translations Defend The Trinity Doctrine Of Trinity Faith System

[KingJ]

I've refuted most of these at least 3 times on this board and I'm not going to do it again. If you really want the truth look them up yourself. Already got booted off here once for doing just that. Seems you are not allowed to post scriptures that disprove the trinity. If you care to email me privately I'll gladly have this conversation with you. Looking forward to it. (pemckeejr@aol.com)

@paths that cross , @Searchingtoo There is SO much scripture you are misreading and ignoring. Almost the entirety of the bible and God's plan for mankind is flying over your head.

Before you even discuss scripture, you need to first explain how your non-trinitarian belief paints a picture of a good God Psalm 136:1, one who is righteous in all His ways Psalm 145:17, unthinkable that He do what is wicked and pervert justice Job 34:12.

I will argue that a non trinitarian belief paints God in a terrible light. It implies that He does not truly love us. He got some unlucky fella who drew the shortest straw to suddenly '''be the love of our lives''. Ordained an extra cruel and torturous death by making him a lamb to the slaughter.

St Augustine once commented about the Trinity that “in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable''.

There is a reason Islam does not recognize Jesus as God. If I were the Pope I would re-classify all who believe as you do ''non-Christian''. You need a cult name. That way it won't be wolves in sheep clothing.

 

[Searchingtoo]

I think John 1 disagrees with you.
Seperate but same.

John 1:1 and the Coptic Versions

 

[Searchingtoo]

@paths that cross , @Searchingtoo There is SO much scripture you are misreading and ignoring. Almost the entirety of the bible and God's plan for mankind is flying over your head.

Before you even discuss scripture, you need to first explain how your non-trinitarian belief paints a picture of a good God Psalm 136:1, one who is righteous in all His ways Psalm 145:17, unthinkable that He do what is wicked and pervert justice Job 34:12.

I will argue that a non trinitarian belief paints God in a terrible light. It implies that He does not truly love us. He got some unlucky fella who drew the shortest straw to suddenly '''be the love of our lives''. Ordained an extra cruel and torturous death by making him a lamb to the slaughter.

St Augustine once commented about the Trinity that “in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable''.

There is a reason Islam does not recognize Jesus as God. If I were the Pope I would re-classify all who believe as you do ''non-Christian''. You need a cult name. That way it won't be wolves in sheep clothing.

Here's a few I didn't leave out:

John 14:28 Jesus said "My Father is greater than I am"

John 17:3 "that they may know you (Father) the only true God"

1 Corinthians 8:6 "yet for us there is one God, the Father"

John 5:30 I can of myself do nothing...I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me.

John 8:28 "I do nothing of myself, but as the Father has taught me"

John 20:17 "go to my brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God"
Revelation 3:2 - Jesus calls God "my God" after he goes to heaven
Revelation 3:12 - again calls God "my God" after he is in heaven
Matthew 27:46 - My God, My God, why have you forsaken me
Revelation 1:6 - his God and Father

Called the son of God:
Mark 3:1
Luke 4:41
John 1:34
John 11:27

Called God the son
0

Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Rev 3:14 "the beginning of the creation of God"
John 3:16 "only begotten son"
John 1:`4 "only begotten of the Father"
Hebrews 1:6 "only firstborn"

1 Timothy "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"

Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the son, but only the Father"

1 Corinthians 15:27,28 For he “has put everything under his feet.”[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

Luke 22:42 "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me: Never the less not my will, but thine be done"

Proverbs 8:22 created, formed, brought forth, possessed
Matthew 11:19 Jesus identified as wisdom

 

[KingJ]

Here's a few I didn't leave out:

John 14:28 Jesus said "My Father is greater than I am"

John 17:3 "that they may know you (Father) the only true God"

1 Corinthians 8:6 "yet for us there is one God, the Father"

John 5:30 I can of myself do nothing...I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me.

John 8:28 "I do nothing of myself, but as the Father has taught me"

John 20:17 "go to my brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God"
Revelation 3:2 - Jesus calls God "my God" after he goes to heaven
Revelation 3:12 - again calls God "my God" after he is in heaven
Matthew 27:46 - My God, My God, why have you forsaken me
Revelation 1:6 - his God and Father

Called the son of God:
Mark 3:1
Luke 4:41
John 1:34
John 11:27

Called God the son
0

Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Rev 3:14 "the beginning of the creation of God"
John 3:16 "only begotten son"
John 1:`4 "only begotten of the Father"
Hebrews 1:6 "only firstborn"

1 Timothy "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"

Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the son, but only the Father"

1 Corinthians 15:27,28 For he “has put everything under his feet.”[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

Luke 22:42 "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me: Never the less not my will, but thine be done"

Proverbs 8:22 created, formed, brought forth, possessed
Matthew 11:19 Jesus identified as wisdom

Any clown / devil can cherry pick scripture. I asked a specific question which you are avoiding.

 

[Searchingtoo]

Here's a few I didn't leave out:

John 14:28 Jesus said "My Father is greater than I am"

John 17:3 "that they may know you (Father) the only true God"

1 Corinthians 8:6 "yet for us there is one God, the Father"

John 5:30 I can of myself do nothing...I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me.

John 8:28 "I do nothing of myself, but as the Father has taught me"

John 20:17 "go to my brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God"
Revelation 3:2 - Jesus calls God "my God" after he goes to heaven
Revelation 3:12 - again calls God "my God" after he is in heaven
Matthew 27:46 - My God, My God, why have you forsaken me
Revelation 1:6 - his God and Father

Called the son of God:
Mark 3:1
Luke 4:41
John 1:34
John 11:27

Called God the son
0

Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Rev 3:14 "the beginning of the creation of God"
John 3:16 "only begotten son"
John 1:`4 "only begotten of the Father"
Hebrews 1:6 "only firstborn"

1 Timothy "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"

Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the son, but only the Father"

1 Corinthians 15:27,28 For he “has put everything under his feet.”[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

Luke 22:42 "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me: Never the less not my will, but thine be done"

Proverbs 8:22 created, formed, brought forth, possessed
Matthew 11:19 Jesus identified as wisdom

I just posted those for your convenience since it seemed you had trouble finding the truth about the trinity from scripture. I didn't see any intelligent questions from you, just rambling.

 

[KingJ]

I just posted those for your convenience since it seemed you had trouble finding the truth about the trinity from scripture. I didn't see any intelligent questions from you, just rambling.

''did not see any intelligent questions'' LMAO, I asked the single biggest question all trinitarians ask. You post like an AI bot. 'Oh trinity chat', let me copy paste all my cherry picked scriptures and completely avoid any discussion.

 

[Searchingtoo]

''did not see any intelligent questions'' LMAO, I asked the single biggest question all trinitarians ask. You post like an AI bot. 'Oh trinity chat', let me copy paste all my cherry picked scriptures and completely avoid any discussion.

I posted my email. If you will email me I'm glad to discuss anything with you, but the moderator will not allow it on here. Email me if you are serious and not just full of bluster.

 

[KingJ]

I posted my email. If you will email me I'm glad to discuss anything with you, but the moderator will not allow it on here. Email me if you are serious and not just full of bluster.

You come across like a painful person in your posts. The moderators will not allow you to push heresy here.

There are other Christian forums that discuss the trinity with no moderation. I have been on these and discussed the topic ad nauseam.

As with most topics and people, trying to get someone to explain how their belief that is '''biblical'' does not paint God as evil, is seemingly impossible. This is the only discussion I wanted with you. I don't think moderators would be harsh on that discussion. A discussion of logic if you will. As I mention here Misrepresenting God to the lost - Do not make this mistake!.

 

[Searchingtoo]

You come across like a painful person in your posts. The moderators will not allow you to push heresy here.

There are other Christian forums that discuss the trinity with no moderation. I have been on these and discussed the topic ad nauseam.

As with most topics and people, trying to get someone to explain how their belief that is '''biblical'' does not paint God as evil, is seemingly impossible. This is the only discussion I wanted with you. I don't think moderators would be harsh on that discussion. A discussion of logic if you will. As I mention here Misrepresenting God to the lost - Do not make this mistake!.

You are such a joke! If you have backbone enough just email me so we can have an honest discussion but stop posting your ridiculous comments for me here. If not, I understand.

 

[KingJ]

You are such a joke! If you have backbone enough just email me so we can have an honest discussion but stop posting your ridiculous comments for me here. If not, I understand.

I am trying to have a conversation with you on the picture your belief paints of God. You are being elusive. All you want to do....is....hammer....your......belief.

This is a '''discussion''' forum.

 

[Butch5]

@paths that cross , @Searchingtoo There is SO much scripture you are misreading and ignoring. Almost the entirety of the bible and God's plan for mankind is flying over your head.

Before you even discuss scripture, you need to first explain how your non-trinitarian belief paints a picture of a good God Psalm 136:1, one who is righteous in all His ways Psalm 145:17, unthinkable that He do what is wicked and pervert justice Job 34:12.

I will argue that a non trinitarian belief paints God in a terrible light. It implies that He does not truly love us. He got some unlucky fella who drew the shortest straw to suddenly '''be the love of our lives''. Ordained an extra cruel and torturous death by making him a lamb to the slaughter.

St Augustine once commented about the Trinity that “in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable''.

There is a reason Islam does not recognize Jesus as God. If I were the Pope I would re-classify all who believe as you do ''non-Christian''. You need a cult name. That way it won't be wolves in sheep clothing.

How about you show us where the Bible speaks of Trinitarianism.

 

[Butch5]

You come across like a painful person in your posts. The moderators will not allow you to push heresy here.

There are other Christian forums that discuss the trinity with no moderation. I have been on these and discussed the topic ad nauseam.

As with most topics and people, trying to get someone to explain how their belief that is '''biblical'' does not paint God as evil, is seemingly impossible. This is the only discussion I wanted with you. I don't think moderators would be harsh on that discussion. A discussion of logic if you will. As I mention here Misrepresenting God to the lost - Do not make this mistake!.

That any Chriatian forum puts any Biblically related doctrine off limits should show you it cannot be defended. A defensible doctrine doesn't need protecting.

 

[Christ4Ever]

That any Chriatian forum puts any Biblically related doctrine off limits should show you it cannot be defended. A defensible doctrine doesn't need protecting.

Dear Butch5,
I agree up to a point.
First do you make it a point to come to a site any site or even a church, knowing that the statement of faith (SOF) states something you do not believe in, and you join it anyway? Maybe you do, in the belief that ultimately you want to get the truth out there or make a point on whatever motivates you no matter how insulting doing so maybe. Do, you not give the Administrator, or Staff, or Ministry etc. the opportunity to answer your questions first instead of standing front and center and present it anyway?

Now, the presenter does not identify themselves, as to who they are, or the purpose behind it except to bring down "Trinitarians" to the falsehood they are following.

I will be honest. Do I know all the manuscripts used in the versions of the Bibles being used in these days? No.
Do I know Greek? No.
Do I know Hebrew? No
Do I know Aramaic? No
And the list goes on.
Do, I know what the Holy Spirit has opened my eyes to as it pertains to the Godhead? Yes.

So, do I take what this individual states as being true, especially as it pertains to all the "Manuscripts" in existence, over what the Holy Spirit has guided me to know from the poorly translated Bible versions I have read according to them? No.

Does this individual state what Bible Version they actually read/use? Not that I know of. So, he only reads the manuscripts and no other version or translation of the Bible? Which tells me he has translated the Bible himself, with help from no other...sadly, I do find this hard to believe, as much as he finds it hard to believe in the Trinity!

No, just so we are clear. The originator of this tread stated he has read/translated from the "Original Manuscripts" and more than once! Guess what? There are no "Original Manuscripts" in existence, or what they are called which is "Autographs". All we have are copies.

It seems this individual has angst against Trinitarians. Makes it a point to state that none elsewhere have refuted what he presents. Well, what scholars has he contacted that maybe helped in translating the manuscripts to the versions now used? Or has he talked to people like me, whose basis of knowledge of Greek, Hebrew etc. is non-existent, but whose understanding of the Scripture I do read comes from the Holy Spirit?

I am sorry, I will not accept what he is trying to sell, that what has been translated without speaking to the authors of these translations were purposely inserting false information in order to further their own agenda. Possible if you were talking about one or two, but the dozens of believers throughout the years, of translators of Scripture that have done the pain staking task of translating all conspired to do this, and some even to the giving up of their lives? Especially knowing what the consequences are for those changing God's Word will require of them???

Would he even tell you, us, if he did find satisfactory replies from actual scholars in his travels, or are we only hearing about those who could not, or did not answer him?

At the very least when someone like this joins a site, and let's say a Trinitarian site, and proceeds to post content such as this knowing it speaks against the SOF of the site that upon joining, they would abide by, makes me question at the very least their integrity for expedience over truly "iron sharpening iron" with those who believe Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Oh, by the way Brother. Have you noticed that the thread is still up and has not been deleted?

Just know if you come barging into my house all righteous as if you own the right to do and say whatever you want. I will be showing you the door.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Butch5]

Dear Butch5,
I agree up to a point.
First do you make it a point to come to a site any site or even a church, knowing that the statement of faith (SOF) states something you do not believe in, and you join it anyway? Maybe you do, in the belief that ultimately you want to get the truth out there or make a point on whatever motivates you no matter how insulting doing so maybe. Do, you not give the Administrator, or Staff, or Ministry etc. the opportunity to answer your questions first instead of standing front and center and present it anyway?

Now, the presenter does not identify themselves, as to who they are, or the purpose behind it except to bring down "Trinitarians" to the falsehood they are following.

I will be honest. Do I know all the manuscripts used in the versions of the Bibles being used in these days? No.
Do I know Greek? No.
Do I know Hebrew? No
Do I know Aramaic? No
And the list goes on.
Do, I know what the Holy Spirit has opened my eyes to as it pertains to the Godhead? Yes.

So, do I take what this individual states as being true, especially as it pertains to all the "Manuscripts" in existence, over what the Holy Spirit has guided me to know from the poorly translated Bible versions I have read according to them? No.

Does this individual state what Bible Version they actually read/use? Not that I know of. So, he only reads the manuscripts and no other version or translation of the Bible? Which tells me he has translated the Bible himself, with help from no other...sadly, I do find this hard to believe, as much as he finds it hard to believe in the Trinity!

No, just so we are clear. The originator of this tread stated he has read/translated from the "Original Manuscripts" and more than once! Guess what? There are no "Original Manuscripts" in existence, or what they are called which is "Autographs". All we have are copies.

It seems this individual has angst against Trinitarians. Makes it a point to state that none elsewhere have refuted what he presents. Well, what scholars has he contacted that maybe helped in translating the manuscripts to the versions now used? Or has he talked to people like me, whose basis of knowledge of Greek, Hebrew etc. is non-existent, but whose understanding of the Scripture I do read comes from the Holy Spirit?

I am sorry, I will not accept what he is trying to sell, that what has been translated without speaking to the authors of these translations were purposely inserting false information in order to further their own agenda. Possible if you were talking about one or two, but the dozens of believers throughout the years, of translators of Scripture that have done the pain staking task of translating all conspired to do this, and some even to the giving up of their lives? Especially knowing what the consequences are for those changing God's Word will require of them???

Would he even tell you, us, if he did find satisfactory replies from actual scholars in his travels, or are we only hearing about those who could not, or did not answer him?

At the very least when someone like this joins a site, and let's say a Trinitarian site, and proceeds to post content such as this knowing it speaks against the SOF of the site that upon joining, they would abide by, makes me question at the very least their integrity for expedience over truly "iron sharpening iron" with those who believe Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Oh, by the way Brother. Have you noticed that the thread is still up and has not been deleted?

Just know if you come barging into my house all righteous as if you own the right to do and say whatever you want. I will be showing you the door.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

Hi Nick,

I know nothing about the person who started the thread. My point was simply that by putting doctrines off limits they can never be discussed. What if those doctrines are wrong? How are Christians ever to come to the truth if they cannot discuss doctrines? It's been my experience on Christian forums that doctrines that can't be defended are put into the "Off Limits" category. It seems to me if a doctrine is Biblical there'd be no problem proving it. So, why would these doctrines be made off limits? Isn't it more important to get to the truth of Scripture as opposed to protecting church doctrines? I just don't see how one gets to the truth of Scriputre if we make certain doctrines off limits.

I don't mean any offense when I say this, This has been my experience. I've heard many a Chriatian say that a doctrine they hold to came to them from the Holy Spirit. Many times these doctrines were flatly refuted by Scripture. That leaves me with two possible conclusions. Either the Holy Spirit is contradicting Scripture or that person mistakenly believes they got their doctrine from the Holy Spirit. Which do you suppose it is? Keep in mind that these people honestly believe they got their doctrine from the Spirit. Given that belief, what are the chances they'd ever consider the validity of that doctrine? These doctrines then get so embedded in Christianity that they never get challenged. This how we got here.

Consider this. The doctrine of the Trinity was codified in the Athanasian Creed. The Athanasian Creed starts this way.

"Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.
Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally."

They then go on to explain the Trinity. The Creed ends this way.

"This is the catholic faith:
one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully."

So, it was at this point where, unless you believed in the Trinity you cannot be saved. Where did Jesus or any of the apostles say people couldn't be saved unless they believe the Trinity? Where did any pastor or theologian in the first second or third century say one couldn't be save unless they believe the Trinity doctrine? Why is it necessary to believe a doctrine that was never espoused by Jesus or the apostles?

 

[Christ4Ever]

Dear Butch5

I've heard many a Chriatian say that a doctrine they hold to came to them from the Holy Spirit.

If you are implying that this is what I said, I suggest you reread what I wrote. This is not what I said.

Consider this. The doctrine of the Trinity was codified in the Athanasian Creed.

What does "codified" mean?
Trinity was a belief that was held prior to this was it not? How did those whoever they may be that believed in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit as One God come to that conclusion?
It's kind of like the Rapture argument against it. The word is not mentioned in the Bible, so it cannot be so.

Consider this. The doctrine of the Trinity was codified in the Athanasian Creed. The Athanasian Creed starts this way.

"Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.
Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally."

They then go on to explain the Trinity. The Creed ends this way.

"This is the catholic faith:
one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully."

So, it was at this point where, unless you believed in the Trinity you cannot be saved. Where did Jesus or any of the apostles say people couldn't be saved unless they believe the Trinity? Where did any pastor or theologian in the first second or third century say one couldn't be save unless they believe the Trinity doctrine? Why is it necessary to believe a doctrine that was never espoused by Jesus or the apostles?

I do not need, nor have I actually used the Athanasian Creed as a foundation for my belief in the Trinity or for any part of Scripture for that matter. For some odd reason you find it necessary for someone to believe something, that it must be necessary that they be taught or learned of it through another means besides just the reading of Scripture and revealed understanding by the Holy Spirit. I do not, and nor should you. The Apostles had Jesus; we have the Holy Spirit, and they too received the Holy Spirit!!!

For many years the topic of the Trinity was strange to me, and I had difficulty wrapping my brain around it. It did not seem to make sense. Oh, I listened to both sides of the discussion, and still came away with the same way I went in. I did not know. Then one day reading Scripture, on something else, and "wham" like a light turned on in the dark, it made sense all of a sudden.

Now that is only part of the problem here. I noticed that you did not address the fact that this site in the SOF is Trinitarian in its belief. Does that make any difference to you at all? Clearly to some, it does not. However, when wearing my Moderator hat, I must be aware that there are many doctrines out there in the World today, that do not match up with what is espoused by this site. Maybe, if this site had no SOF, or left it open then I would have no problem with it. That is not the case, and when a person joining this site and disregards it.

Just noticed the time!!! Sorry have to go (praying at church) but wanted to drop at least this much back to you, so you would see what you posted was not disregarded. Talk later brother!

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[KingJ]

How about you show us where the Bible speaks of Trinitarianism.

Jesus did not sin.

We need to meditate on the topic, not repeat cherry picked scriptures in our mind. A non trinity belief terribly misrepresents God.

 

[Butch5]

Jesus did not sin.

You need to meditate on the topic, not repeat cherry picked scriptures in your mind.

I didn't say He did. I've spent much time dealing with the topic. But youndodnt address the subject.

 

[KingJ]

I didn't say He did. I've spent much time dealing with the topic. But youndodnt address the subject.

Dude, Jesus did not sin. You really need to allow that fact to sink in.

Angels, sin.
Humans, sin.

Like I said, stop focusing on cherry picked scripture and consider the a-z of scripture. Meditate on the topic.

Or, offer a strong logical argument that does not completely misrepresent God and make a mockery of Christianity as a non-trinitarian belief does. As St Augustine said: “in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable''.

 

[Butch5]

Dear Butch5

If you are implying that this is what I said, I suggest you reread what I wrote. This is not what I said.

I'm not implying anything. Just giving my experience.

What does "codified" mean?.

It was formalized in the Athanasian Creed.

Trinity was a belief that was held prior to this was it not?

Not that im aware of. At least not in the form of the Athanasian Creed. Tertullian is the one who is credited with coining the term Trinity as it relates to Christianity. However, he didn't believe there were three persons as one God

How did those whoever they may be that believed in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit as One God come to that conclusion? It’s

That's a good question. It was the Catholic Church that formalized the doctrine. How they came to that idea is beyond me. It seems totally illogical.

It's kind of like the Rapture argument against it. The word is not mentioned in the Bible, so it cannot be so.

I don't think so. The word rapture doesn't appear in Scripture but the Scriptures do speak of being caught up into the air with the Lord. It's not just that the Trinity doctrine isn't mentioned. There is Scripture saying just the opposite.

I do not need, nor have I actually used the Athanasian Creed as a foundation for my belief in the Trinity or for any part of Scripture for that matter. For some odd reason you find it necessary for someone to believe something, that it must be necessary that they be taught or learned of it through another means besides just the reading of Scripture and revealed understanding by the Holy Spirit. I do not, and nor should you. The Apostles had Jesus; we have the Holy Spirit, and they too received the Holy Spirit!!!

I wasn't suggesting you got the idea of the Trinity from the Athanasian Creed. I was simply pointing that those who wrote it said if you don't believe it you can't be saved. I'm not aware of anything in Scripture that says if someone doesn't believe the Trinity doctrine they can't be saved. Why would someone say that? Could it be for control? Could it be to scare the illiterate population ( I'm referring to 5th century Christians) so as to control them? Or, could it be to force people to believe something that the church couldn't prove? If they had something that didn't make sense yet they wanted the force the people to believe it, what better way than telling them they have to believe it or they can't be saved?

Let me ask a question. Have you ever changed your position on a doctrine? I have. I believe most have. If we're getting our doctrines via the Holy Spirit why would we change them? I changed doctrines because I learned they didn't align with God's word. How many people have beleived the Holy Spirit lead them to some doctrine only to later change their position on that doctrine?

I'm not saying the Spirit doesn't guide us. But, how exactly do we know some doctrine has to us from the Spirit versus us just coming to a rational understanding? This brings me back to my previous point. If we believe we've come to a doctrine via the Spirit, how likely are we to ever question that doctrine. I mean many Christians don't even question doctrines they've been taught by pastors let alone questioning one they believe came via the Spirit. How do we know which it is?

For many years the topic of the Trinity was strange to me, and I had difficulty wrapping my brain around it. It did not seem to make sense. Oh, I listened to both sides of the discussion, and still came away with the same way I went in. I did not know. Then one day reading Scripture, on something else, and "wham" like a light turned on in the dark, it made sense all of a sudden.

How do you know that was the Spirit? I would be interested in seeing how it made sense to you.

Now that is only part of the problem here. I noticed that you did not address the fact that this site in the SOF is Trinitarian in its belief. Does that make any difference to you at all?

I did address the SOF in an indirect way when I asked how can anyone know the truth if a doctrine is off limits. I'm not sure what you mean when you asked if it makes any difference to me. If you're asking does it make a difference as far as fellowship, no not at all. I assume the SOF is the position of the forum owner and/or the Mods. I'm not sure why you brought up the SOF. Is it to say unless you believe this one can't partake of this board? The SOF is a statement of what the owner/mods believe, that doesn't mean it's Scriptural. There are millions of Christians who believe man has an immortal soul, yet the Scriptures say that the Father alone has immortality.

Clearly to some, it does not. However, when wearing my Moderator hat, I must be aware that there are many doctrines out there in the World today, that do not match up with what is espoused by this site. Maybe, if this site had no SOF, or left it open then I would have no problem with it. That is not the case, and when a person joining this site and disregards it.

I'm not sure challenging it is disregarding it. But again, is the SOF a required belief? If so then how does one ever find out if it's true? If only those who hold the doctrine are allowed to speak on the subject how do we ever find out? If that's the case then we just become an echo chamber echoing each other's beliefs. Actually, I believe that is one of the biggest problems in the church today. It's become an echo chamber. The denominations only fellowship with like denominations. If one doesn’t agree with them they're an outcast. It's kind of like we see the left doing with their canceling people. If someone goes into a church and says things the church disagrees with they're cancelled.

Just noticed the time!!! Sorry have to go (praying at church) but wanted to drop at least this much back to you, so you would see what you posted was not disregarded. Talk later brother!

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><

No worries. Prayer is more important. I hope you have a great evening.

 

[Butch5]

Dude, Jesus did not sin. You really need to allow that fact to sink in.

Angels, sin.
Humans, sin.

Like I said, stop focusing on cherry picked scripture and consider the a-z of scripture. Meditate on the topic.

Or, offer a strong logical argument that does not completely misrepresent God and make a mockery of Christianity as a non-trinitarian belief does. As St Augustine said: “in no other subject is error more dangerous, or inquiry more laborious, or the discovery of truth more profitable''.

I never said He did. I haven't posted any verses, so, how exactly am I cherry picking? Could it be that you have no argument?

How exactly does a non Trinitarian belief misrepresent God or make a mockery of Christianity.

Do you hold to the doctrine of Penal Atonement?