Note: Before reading the following arguments, please understand that they are not what I believe. On Wednesdays, I deliberately argue for wrong ideas, challenging my listeners to call and defend the obvious right answer, which is usually far harder than one would expect. This is a summary of what Wacky Andrew will be arguing, not a representation of what real Andrew believes.
~It’s not mentioned explicitly in the Bible.
~Early Christians didn’t hold to it. It’s use didn’t show up until 215 AD with Tertullian.
~How can a central truth about God’s nature be so incomprehensibly confusing?
~This doctrine looks like Orwellian doublespeak, especially to simple monotheists like Jews and Muslims.
~Jesus cannot be God: God cannot die, Jesus said there were things He did not know, and Jesus said that only God is good.
~Jesus and the Father are not equal: Jesus obeyed the Father under duress, how can a Son coexist with His own Father, and Jesus said the Father is greater than he is.
~Many of the passages in the New Testament do specifically refer to God and His Son, but not the Holy Spirit.
Links:
Trinity (Wikipedia)
Trinity (Good links below) (Theopedia)
Implications of the Trinity (Blog)
What does the Bible say about the Trinity (Blog)
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Sermon) (Tim Keller)
The Trinity (CARM)
Doctrine of the TrinityWhat is the doctrine of the Trinity? (Desiring God)
A brief definition of the Trinity (James White)
Passages showing Jesus is God (CARM)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I would say this is correct! It is not important to speak/teach the trinity doctrine. Why?
1) The Bible does not teach it in any way, shape, fashion, or form.
2) The doctrine is from a completely pagan background.
3) The doctrine is in offense to the true God of the Bible, Jehovah (or Yahwah).
4) The doctrine is an offense to our Lord Jesus Christ who did not teach it, imply it, refer to it, and who did not aspire to it.
Before we go any farther, I think it's only fair to ask which alternative doctrine you think the Bible clearly supports. Are you offering Modalism (one God revealed in three different ways), Tritheism (three equal and independent Gods), or Arianism (Jesus is not eternally and fully God)? Or do you have some other alternative?
The only way to proceed in such discussions is to see which of two competing interpretations best fits the totality of Scripture. For you to post your four reasons this particular doctrine is unacceptable still leaves us with no better alternative to replace it with. So, what specific alternative are you offering? If you're not sure, you might want to visit the Theopedia link included below for clarity on the label you intend to defend.
Andrew, I would have to say that I am close to what you call "Arianism". However, from what I have studied about "arianism" I differ in that I believe Jesus had a pre-human existance as a spirit son of God, devested himself of his spirit nature and partook of human nature - fully and only human - then died as mankind's ransom sacrifice for sin, was resurrected by the Father back to heavenly life but to a higher level and quality of life then he had before he was born on earth.
Consequently, he is not God, a part of God, a third of God, a third God, or a part of some "godhead". He is the obedient servant and Son of Jehovah (Yahweh) and always does the Father's will - not his own.
Post a Comment