jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (5 posts)

Godhead Terminology

  1. Oscarlites profile image27
    Oscarlitesposted 2 years ago

    At this point in my life, I cannot find substance or proof in the Bible to validate using the term trinity, for these reasons:

    1) It is not a term used in the bible.
    2) There is no reference in the bible of God asking us to re-explain his diety and existence.
    3) There is no prophecy or reference to the Holy spirit being a human.
    4) There is specific reference to God being a spirit and not having flesh and bones. Only in the son-ship is there a bodily form specified, and that as a heavenly conception.
    5) In the birth of Jesus there was a baby that grew up into a man, and that defies reference to an eternal flesh and blood person. he would have had to be already grown up in heaven and then reborn into the flesh as a baby.
    6) I feel safer not using Tertullian based trinity or any other human concept or doctrine for the simple reason they are man-made, and not authenticated by the scripture.
    7) Isaiah (old testament prophet) amply allows for the Christ child, and the savior to come, without altering or changing the eternal oneness of God. All of Isaiah is filled with Gods Oneship. WE might be bringing a curse by trying to make that oneness into three distinct persons with distinct humanness, separate minds, separate goals, etc.   
    8) The purpose of God was fulfilled in a father-son-holy spirit manifestation. It was his method to reach mankind and to re-unite us to himself. It was not to separate or to present separate god-ships, as that would have violated who he was.

    conclusion:  I can believe in the God of the Bible without using a man made concept of trinity.  I understand for many that this is a stumbling-block, as they have been mainstreamed into orthodoxy, Catholic, Trinity, and other religious tradition.

    Many world-wide believers have remained true to the Bible and its teachings. If you do so, however, you won't be using the word trinity, or terms like "co-equal persons" because the aren't in Gods book of life.  God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. there's nothing hard or complicated about that. When it says Great is the mystery of Godliness, God was manifest in the flesh, he didn't say "in three fleshs" , but only one flesh.. how he otherwise manifested himself in history is best left as it is.   
    Several times we are told, "but ye brethren may understand the mystery, are not in darkness, etc.:"   Rightly dividing the word of truth and loving the truth is important. We must not add any man made doctrines, of which there are many. Trinity doctrine was created and written and approved by supposed converted Roman scholars who were engaged in taking over the fledgling but already established church and this doctrine was incorporated and has dominated many organizations without authenticity, except by church  propagation of councils, and orders and as a separate doctrine than of the true bible. HOW can it be believed or taught as truth, if it has been (supposedly) added to the faith as a valid teaching, yet authored not by God, but by man? Why would anyone WANT to add to the word?

    IF God DOES have a specific form or shape, it obviously is not a human body, as he is God, and he specifically says he does not have flesh and bones. to think so even is silly. to think that of the spirit is just as silly.  perhaps it is just as humans with human minds we think we have to give God a Body that we can identify.   well,  could it just be, that he did give us one we could identify and trust in and hope for ?    the person of Jesus in Salvation.   WE will know the rest of it as soon as we have our glorified bodies and are over there in the supernatural realm, right?    according to Isaiah 9:6, Jesus IS the mighty God come in the flesh.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    You said:
    "The purpose of God was fulfilled in a father-son-holy spirit manifestation.
    It was his method to reach mankind and to re-unite us to himself.
    It was not to separate or to present separate god-ships, as that would have* violated* who he was." How/why?

    What are you concerned about or what are you rejecting and why?
    Maybe I do not understand the conception of the trinity. What it is?
    Is it something Constantine came up with and you do not agree with it because, God is Spirit?
    What did Constantine say?

    I went there, but it is very confusing.
    I think I agree with you.

  3. Oscarlites profile image27
    Oscarlitesposted 2 years ago

    yes.  thanks, Kathryn!  Constantine tried to re- invent the Godhead and to re-write the origin of the early church. the real disciples were driven into caves and catacombs just to survive. what happened doctrinally, and the invention of the trinity concept, with subsequent "purges" allowed this falsehood of religion to impose on the future and it still seems to overshadow the real gospel, which yet in spite of it all, no one doubts that Jesus Christ is the True God come in the Flesh and The Holy Spirit is God living in us in spirit. Joel 2:28, Acts 2:17 show a Old/new testament thread of how the Holy spirit was meant to be poured out. it doesn't make it a co- equal anything. "equal" by itself would better fit, IF we had to re-define what God already set down in His word.

  4. Live to Learn profile image79
    Live to Learnposted 2 years ago

    The idea of someone appearing in the flesh, who existed from the beginning of time cannot be logically explained. That’s just the nature of our understanding of existence. It is our nature to speculate. But religions built around one form of speculation being superior to another form of speculation should be frowned upon; in my opinion. There is no evidence that one belief structure is more heavenly approved, or that another is not. Our speculation should not include words such as ‘truth’ attempting to back up our conclusions. There is no truth which can be verified by humanity. Were I to employ the term ‘truth’ it would imply that I, or someone I followed, were in direct contact with God. That is too dangerous a belief to adopt. We’ve seen the travesty of how that plays throughout recorded history.

    The term ‘trinity’ is a difficult concept to discuss. I have no problem with the term primarily because I don’t consider it implying separation. What it implies to me is a universal wholeness. A ubiquitous presence which can manifest in many ways. This isn’t a ‘man made’ doctrine. It is simply my understanding of the story, taken as a whole. However, I’m not inclined to push it as ‘truth’ because in doing so I know it would become a stumbling block to another who can’t follow my personal train of thought.  It doesn’t really matter (in my opinion) in the grand scheme of things.

    I suppose my point is that taking Bible verses and putting them together to come to a belief structure which we think elevates our understanding of God, above the rest of humanity, only serves to pull us away from the intent of the story.

    Galations 3:28 says   There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. That was said when Christianity was newly formed. Today, it would be realistic to add 'there are no Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, etc, etc. for all are one in Christ Jesus.'

    1. Oscarlites profile image27
      Oscarlitesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      good thoughts, Live to Learn..  that is a good attitude to portray.  Good words!