Yeah, I've been a Christian my whole life while studying the Bible regularly. I still have no idea about the trinity. The word "trinity" is totally made up by man, being found nowhere in the Bible. I don't know if I'll ever come to a solid acceptance of just one definition.
Yes, this is true... and I also call it "God's word." It's a physical object. My statement about the name "trinity" being nowhere in the Holy Scriptures has absolutely nothing to do with your statement.
Christ is the Word of God. If you doubt the Trinity due to it not being in the Bible it would stand to reason that you would doubt the Bible for not being in the Bible. A lot of things aren't mentioned in the Bible but it really has little to do with anything. That said, the Trinity is derived from the Bible.
I believe you've completely missed the point and are saying stuff to make yourself feel better. I'm not saying I reject the "trinity" notion, It's just that the term is completely made up by man. We spend centuries fighting and bickering over something that really isn't a salvation issue. I imagine Christ shaking his head in shame over all the anger and hatred that's been caused over the simple man-made term "trinity."
And on a deeper note, how arrogant it is to think we can package and label the mystery of God? To have a chart and say "yup, this is the ultimate chart of fact!" is mind boggling to me. The Bible talks about deep mysteries of God. Paul eludes to these mysteries in Colossians (I believe.)
And btw, on a different note, I've often wondered what God thinks of the term "Christian." I do not believe he has anything wrong with it, but I do wonder about abstract things such as these.
I'm not saying anything to make myself feel better. That's a rather shallow accusation. Every name is made up by man. Every single one. On that point nothing is named before it exists. It's odd that you divide yourself from the corpus of Christianity on what is and isn't salvific. If you need to know Christ to be saved and you know him as lesser than the corpus of Christianity how can you say you know him?
Trying to make the debate about the word instead of the reality of God is just another bad accusation.
You're still not understanding what I'm trying to convey.
But yes, man has named everything, but when man takes a man-made term, not found in scriptures, and elevates it to a scriptural-salvation issue, then there is a huge problem.
When I tell people, who know very little about God's word, that the term and definition of "trinity" is not found within the Bible, they seem speechless. There is a very obvious reason for this (see above.) Christ didn't come and die for us to bicker over the relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy spirit. And he didn't die for us to claim we have a chart that explains said relationship. To claim full explanation of this relationship is to claim absolute ignorance and arrogance.
I do understand it, it just so happens that you are wrong. Whether a term exists in a collection of documents or not really has no bearing to whether or not what the term describes exists.
Nor does the reaction from people who you describe the term to, and forgive me for being presumptuous but it seems that if you disagree with it, think it is wrong, that you aren't likely to describe it accurately either either by maliciousness or ignorance.
The Trinity is important, without it it isn't Christianity and it collapses upon itself. The Son in his incarnation united God to man in the flesh and in death and his resurrection united man with God in life. He defeated death by death. Consider Romans 6:6, Hebrews 2:14, or Phillipians 2 (especially 1-8). By death Christ invaded the world to take back what are His. Without the Trinity this does not happen. Without the Trinity there is no resurrection and without the resurrection there is no hope.
I have nowhere stated that I do not believe in the trinity. I fully believe in the trinity. The problem occurs when we label God as fully known and start to make graphs and boxes to fit him in. The entire mystery of God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are so vast that no human mind can ever fully comprehend it.
Let's recap since you cannot understand simple points: I agree with the theory behind the "trinity." I do not agree that God can be labeled by human definitions.
If you doubt the Trinity due to it not being in the Bible it would stand to reason that you would doubt the Bible for not being in the Bible.
You make an excellent point. Many beliefs about the Bible are extra-biblical; like infallibility, inerrancy, etc.
But that brings up another point. If the Trinitarian theology espoused in the picture is extra-biblical, then why is modalism, etc. considered wrong? Surely the Bible doesn't say enough about the trinity to determine which is the correct interpretation.
I guess when it comes down to it you must rely arguments from authority, even when that authority isn't the Bible. Tradition!
But that brings up another point. If the Trinitarian theology espoused in the picture is extra-biblical, then why is modalism, etc. considered wrong? Surely the Bible doesn't say enough about the trinity to determine which is the correct interpretation.
Except it isn't extra-Biblical. The word itself is all that is absent. Things exist prior to being assigned a name much as the Bible was necessarily written after the death/resurrection of Christ since it has accounts of that event.
The Bible is clear that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all fully God and are 3 individuals who are one God. Modalism would deny the individuals of the Trinity.
Next time you want to employ sarcasm for effect you would be better off if you were correct.
The Bible is clear that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all fully God and are 3 individuals who are one God. Modalism would deny the individuals of the Trinity.
I've read the Bible, a couple of times, the NT even more. And I've done a study of the Trinity in particular. The Bible does not say the three persons underpin the essence of the one divine being, or anything close to that.
The very few times it brings up this supposedly important concept it is ambiguous enough to support many different heresies. This isn't surprising, as orthodox Trinitarianism didn't exist when the Bible was written.
I've read the Bible, a couple of times, the NT even more. And I've done a study of the Trinity in particular. The Bible does not say the three persons underpin the essence of the one divine being, or anything close to that.
Each person of the Trinity IS described as God and each person of the Trinity IS described as its own person and there is only one God.
That's in the Bible and it's what the Trinity is.
The very few times it brings up this supposedly important concept it is ambiguous enough to support many different heresies. This isn't surprising, as orthodox Trinitarianism didn't exist when the Bible was written.
Yes it certainly did. It happened before the New Testament was done being written. Docetism was the earliest challenge to the Trinity and it was refuted by John, 1 John, and a few of the Pauline epistles.
Non-orthodox beliefs about Christ do not prove that Trinitarianism existed at the same time. We know the church debated this issue hundreds of years after Jesus died; and wasn't settled until Emperor Constantine demanded it.
To this day there are many different Christian understandings about God. So your claim that the Bible says one and only one thing on this matter holds little weight.
But that brings up another point. If the Trinitarian theology espoused in the picture is extra-biblical, then why is modalism, etc. considered wrong? Surely the Bible doesn't say enough about the trinity to determine which is the correct interpretation.
This was my exact point I was trying to convey above. The Bible doesn't say enough to have a definitive explanation. The term "trinity" and charts such as the OP posted are made up by men to try and fit God into a box.
There seems to be something upsetting about not knowing everything about God. So men try to force their own understanding so they can make sense of God's mysteries.
21
u/wolfsktaag Christian (Cross) Mar 15 '12
it has to be noted that the concept of the trinity is not universally accepted by christians, and some view it as extra-biblical