plaetton:

I chuckle at how both of you ride on each other's pigtail.

frosbel:

The divinity of Christ as the SON of GOD is unquestionable and neither is his Lordship.

However , the Trinity doctrine as perpetuated by the catholic church over a number of centuries is grossly misrepresentative of the biblical position.

The biblical position which must always be taken at face value simply portrays Jesus as the Son of God who sacrificed his life as ordained by the Father for the redemption of mankind from SIN.

The 3-god God is totally contrary and in some ways almost blasphemous to God.

How on earth can people come up with a most improbable mathematical formula of 1+1+1 = 3 , this is truly baffling.


Let us look at it again from a purely logical perspective.



X = God the father is a person, with his own mind, intellect and will = 1

Y = God the SON is a person , with his own mind , intellect and will = 1

Z = God the Holy Spirit is a person, with his own mind, intellect and will = 1


Find W


The most plausible answer will be :

W = X + Y + Z

W = 1 + 1 + 1

W = 3


But according to the Trinitairan this answer is wrong.

It should actually be



W = X X Y X Z

W = 1 x 1 x 1

W = 1


How they arrived at this answer is not only incomprehensible, it is also the bedrock of confusion in many churches today.

Deep Sight:

Yes. But I have done so a great many times already.

If you must discuss it, can we start from addressing these verses please -

Jesus said not to call him " good " as only God is good.[Mark 10:18].

Jesus said he was only a human mediator [1Timothy 2:5].

Jesus said the Father is greater than he is [John 14:28].

Jesus said not to hold on to him, because he too has a God, he said clearly that he worships God, and that he would ascend to his GOD [John 20:17].

Jesus said he was a mere messenger of God and that believers should know God only [John 17:3].

Jesus said he is not omniscient and that there are some things he does not know but only the father knows. [Mark 13:32]?

Omniscience is an attribute of God and so Jesus cannot be God.

Peter wrote that Jesus has a God and Father [1st Peter 1:3].

Luke wrote that Jesus was only a mere man accredited by God [Acts 2:22]

Jesus prayed to God to forgive sinners. [Luke 23.34].

Jesus showed the possibility of a dichotomy of will between himself and God in his Gethsemane Prayer.[Luke 22:42]

The parable of the Vineyard is also cardinal. [Mathew 21: 33-46].

On top of all this, Jesus is described in scripture as the only begotten son of God. The relevant source greek word is monogenes. Being begotten indicates having a beginning. As such, since Jesus had a beginning, he cannot be God, because God is eternal and self existent and has no beginning.

Mr_Anony:
Word!

Ihedinobi:

This is the sentiment for pursuing this discussion with you: we're not about to decide who's right or who's wrong because both of us could very well be wrong; we'll just try to learn the Truth. I say so so that we don't start a war again. I don't like the memories of those skirmishes we had, but I can endure them better than I can endure another show of belligerence.

So, if it's fine with you, I could start a thread to deal with all the points of difficulty with the doctrine of the Trinity that you are willing to point out. I believe that we will also examine unitarianism while we're at it.

Are you game?

plaetton:

I chuckle at how both of you ride on each other's pigtail.

ijawkid: Meaning if I had existed In the time of emperor constantine I would have been banished or killed.!!!!!!...

Na wa o.......

frosbel:

Mate , I am not going down the route of a cyclic endless argument just for the sake of it.

I say Nay - thanks.

Our positions are fixed in parallels, never to meet from eternity without end

A question was asked, and I rightly or wrongly responded.

Allow me humbly take my exit from this article.

plaetton: I am talking about the Nicean creed and its impact, and how its has shaped what christians beleive, and you are talking about what faith means to you. Off topic.

Ihedinobi:

lol...... You really didn't get it?

Mr_Anony:

Why would God have it that way? Because God by nature of who He is, must mete out justice.

Mr_Anony:
The sacrifice of Christ - having been crucified and resurrected - is how God shows mercy and at the same time metes out justice.

F00028:

did you?

the story of the prodigal son for me is the perfect illustration of the concepts of repentance and forgiveness. I just wanna sure Anony is not giving it a new spin to spoil it for me.

F00028: @Ihedinobi
my second question: did Jesus himself teach the trinity in clear, unambiguous terms?

Ihedinobi:

But I have answered this question in two forms already, haven't I? Once in my response to Ptolomeus and once in the excerpt I extracted for you specifically.

There is no ambiguity in the Bible about the Trinity. But neither is there any crystallized teaching on it. I have explained why. You cannot teach fundamentals. You submit fundamentals and found arguments upon them. Jesus did that. He never said, "now I shall teach you about the Trinity of God", but He most certainly said, "I will send you from the Father the Spirit of Truth Who proceeds from Him and He will testify of me". He also very definitely said, as you quoted, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God."

My point is that the teachings of the Bible assume the Trinity. So the best way and, in fact, only way to show it in discussion is to show you how the teachings of the Bible reflect it and what would happen to them if it were not true.

F00028:

justice, yes but not punishment.
this is where a big problem lies for you: you cant seem to make a distinction between the two. you seem to think that once there's an infringement. God has to punish somebody...anybody.

did Jesus Christ teach you that? because according to you Jesus determines the articles of the christian faith.

frosbel:


I am sorry but I read this and had to add......


1. You said "There is no ambiguity in the Bible about the Trinity " - actually there is , otherwise the confusion we see today will be non-existent

frosbel: 2. You said "But neither is there any crystallized teaching on it " - only reinforces the confusion

frosbel: 3. You said "My point is that the teachings of the Bible assume the Trinity." - Open ended statement. You cannot base your arguments on assumptions.

Ihedinobi:

Like Mr Anony said, no, it does not? I will go further to say that it only attempts to articulate our faith. It's not just "things" that we Christians believe, we believe in a Person. That means that we trust, count on, depend on and lay hold upon a Person. That is our protestation. That whatever we may be wrong about or not understand well, we are utterly satisfied that He is enough for us.

The effort of our intelligence is to comprehend Him, to apprehend and be apprehended by Him. And considering that it is God of Whom we speak, the vastness of Him cannot be fully and finally caught in any creed. The basis or foundation may be, but not the fullness.

You could say that in summary I have said that we do not have articles of faith. We have an object of Faith and His name is Jesus Christ.

Ihedinobi:

lol.... You see, the problem here is that you have taken historical information put a spin on it and named it fact and demand that we accept it. Why should we? Can you cite any authority that supports your submission that Christianity was practically defined and established at that council?

Enigma:


I actually once did a thread specifically on whether the Trinity doctrine was "invented" at the Nicene council and even quoted extensively from a Wikipedia entry outlining how early Christians demonstrated belief in the Trinity humdreds of years before the Nicene council and have pointed it out to some of our friends.

But people will believe what they want to believe and say what they want to say -------- well they do say I harp on about intellectual honesty. I think people who are intellectually honest will not harp on that I demand for it in discussions.

frosbel: . . . . Well , we are intellectually honest when we say that your theory of the Trinity is invalid, we need not hear from you or your cohorts to come to this conclusion.

frosbel:


I am sorry but I read this and had to add......


1. You said "There is no ambiguity in the Bible about the Trinity " - actually there is , otherwise the confusion we see today will be non-existent
2. You said "But neither is there any crystallized teaching on it " - only reinforces the confusion
3. You said "My point is that the teachings of the Bible assume the Trinity." - Open ended statement. You cannot base your arguments on assumptions.

thanks.

F00028:
well I rest my case.

Enigma:



Well said in both posts.

The thing is that no matter though how much you explain and provide proof that should satisfy any reasonable person to some of the people here, tomorrow they will still keep shouting Nicea, Nicea, Nicea.

In truth all these things have been dealt with to the knowledge (though maybe not understanding or acceptance) of these people. Whether it is the role of the Nicene Council, suggestions/evidence of the Trinity in the Old Testament etc etc. You will find threads addressing these things in the archives here.

I actually once did a thread specifically on whether the Trinity doctrine was "invented" at the Nicene council and even quoted extensively from a Wikipedia entry outlining how early Christians demonstrated belief in the Trinity hundreds of years before the Nicene council and have pointed it out to some of our friends.

https://www.nairaland.com/497445/trinity-doctrine-invented-council-meeting/2#7181702

But people will believe what they want to believe and say what they want to say -------- well they do say I harp on about intellectual honesty. I think people who are intellectually honest will not harp on that I demand for it in discussions.

Ihedinobi:

I agree.

You have mail, bro.

Enigma:

Bros, I bin don see am; earlier on in the day I was going to start replying but realised I was too tired. E go be tomorrow by God's grace.

Mr_Anony:
Perhaps, you may want to give me your definition of justice as regards crime and punishment.


Oh yes He did!

Lol, anyway, I think I have been able to pass across to you the message of salvation and I believe your have gotten it because the questions you are asking now are no longer questions that truly seek answers rather questions that you are hoping will destabilize me.

You may want to study Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus in John chapter 3

I know the next card you'll probably want to play now is "Where did Jesus really say....?" (hmm, I remember a serpent who said something like that in Genesis, lol)

I think I am done with tangents for now, please I implore you to study John 3 and tell me what you understood. And then perhaps we can have a really interesting and engaging conversation

Enigma:

What I have always said is that to attribute the idea of the Trinity as an "invention" of/at the Nicene council is due to ignorance or intellectual dishonesty.

I stand by that.

Ihedinobi:

Do you really? Consider my responses to those points before you do o.

F00028:
I just did and if it was your intention to confuse me so I forget the original query...you succeeded.

now my third question: since none of the prophets of old taught the trinity, Jesus Christ himself didn't teach it, how did you get it?

Ihedinobi:

Let me explain our situation a little to you. You have asked me two questions demanding yes-or-no answers neither of which options was adequate. So, I explained that while there is no crystallized, that is, standalone, focused teaching on the Trinity attributable to either Old Testament prophets or to Jesus Himself, all their teachings were founded upon it.

I explained further that this is because teachings/arguments/discourses are always premised.

Assumptions must be made by the teacher. They form the premises for his delivery. The teachings of any given authority are only as valid and authoritative as their premises.

Then I claim that these people you asked about premised their teachings upon the Trinity. In saying so, I have answered all three questions you have now asked. I have declared that they taught the Trinity even without devoting specific attention to it. I have also declared that I got my knowledge of the Trinity from their own teachings.