The History of Trinity (Reference facts only)

Bill_Coley

@Bill_Coley said:

@Dave_L said:

But Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. And we are still here with the collected body of truth preserved in the creeds and confessions, and you are merely beating the air with your fists.

The part of your response to Wolfgang that I emphasize with bold-face is one of the most sophisticated, provocative, and disarming theological arguments I've read in quite a while, Dave. Well done.

[Deleted User]

@Dave_L said:
But Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. And we are still here with the collected body of truth preserved in the creeds and confessions, and you are merely beating the air with your fists.

Does what Jesus said about the church state that there would not be any false doctrines floating around and being propagated (such as the Trinity false doctrine or any other false doctrine)? There is mention in NT scripture that already toward the end of the period covered in Acts, false doctrines were taught and believed ...

Dave_L

@Wolfgang said:

@Dave_L said:
But Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. And we are still here with the collected body of truth preserved in the creeds and confessions, and you are merely beating the air with your fists.

Does what Jesus said about the church state that there would not be any false doctrines floating around and being propagated (such as the Trinity false doctrine or any other false doctrine)? There is mention in NT scripture that already toward the end of the period covered in Acts, false doctrines were taught and believed ...

The trinity is standard fair for all of Christendom. It's what separates us from all other religions in the world including yours.

[Deleted User]

@Dave_L said:
The trinity is standard fair for all of Christendom.

This statement is false. There have been throughout history and there are today Christian groups and individuals who do not believe in the Trinity

It's what separates us from all other religions in the world including yours.

It's what separates Trinitarianism from other religious beliefs.

Dave_L

@Wolfgang said:

@Dave_L said:
The trinity is standard fair for all of Christendom.

This statement is false. There have been throughout history and there are today Christian groups and individuals who do not believe in the Trinity

It's what separates us from all other religions in the world including yours.

It's what separates Trinitarianism from other religious beliefs.

Those who are not trinitarian are not part of trinitarian Christianity. They have a different religion all together.

Bill_Coley

@Dave_L said:

Those who are not trinitarian are not part of trinitarian Christianity. They have a different religion all together.

Isn't it true, almost by definition, that people who aren't trinitarian aren't "part of trinitarian Christianity"? More, in my view, there's nothing in your tautological assertion that excludes non-trinitarian Christians from being Christians; they're just not trinitarian Christians.

[Deleted User]

@Dave_L said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Dave_L said:
The trinity is standard fair for all of Christendom.

This statement is false. There have been throughout history and there are today Christian groups and individuals who do not believe in the Trinity

It's what separates us from all other religions in the world including yours.

It's what separates Trinitarianism from other religious beliefs.

Those who are not trinitarian are not part of trinitarian Christianity.

oh oh oh ... those who are not eating apples are not part of those who eat apples ... wow!

They have a different religion all together.

Exactlky ... they do not follow and believe in Trinitarianism religion

Dave_L

@Wolfgang said:

@Dave_L said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Dave_L said:
The trinity is standard fair for all of Christendom.

This statement is false. There have been throughout history and there are today Christian groups and individuals who do not believe in the Trinity

It's what separates us from all other religions in the world including yours.

It's what separates Trinitarianism from other religious beliefs.

Those who are not trinitarian are not part of trinitarian Christianity.

oh oh oh ... those who are not eating apples are not part of those who eat apples ... wow!

They have a different religion all together.

Exactlky ... they do not follow and believe in Trinitarianism religion

But, Christianity is the only religion in the world to worship God in trinity. Since you do not, you are not part of this group.

Dave_L

@Bill_Coley said:

@Dave_L said:

Those who are not trinitarian are not part of trinitarian Christianity. They have a different religion all together.

Isn't it true, almost by definition, that people who aren't trinitarian aren't "part of trinitarian Christianity"? More, in my view, there's nothing in your tautological assertion that excludes non-trinitarian Christians from being Christians; they're just not trinitarian Christians.

Different Christ = different religion.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Bill_Coley said:
Isn't it true, almost by definition, that people who aren't trinitarian aren't "part of trinitarian Christianity"? More, in my view, there's nothing in your tautological assertion that excludes non-trinitarian Christians from being Christians; they're just not trinitarian Christians.

• What is a Christian ? Historically this term came into existence to describe those who worshipped Christ = God (instead of Roman Gods). Acts 11:26
• If you were asked: "Deny Jesus Christ or Die ?" what would you choose ? Monotheistic Muslims with weapons have asked this question followed by putting to death those who would not deny Jesus Christ.

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Bill_Coley said:
Isn't it true, almost by definition, that people who aren't trinitarian aren't "part of trinitarian Christianity"? More, in my view, there's nothing in your tautological assertion that excludes non-trinitarian Christians from being Christians; they're just not trinitarian Christians.

• What is a Christian ? Historically this term came into existence to describe those who worshipped Christ = God (instead of Roman Gods). Acts 11:26

This is a claim based on a false assumption ... at the time of Acts 11, NOBODY considered Jesus = God. It was the followers of Christ, those who believed in Jesus to be the Messiah, who were called "Christian" there at Antioch ... and, by the way, this was in essence a derogatory description given to them; the regular term used was "followers of the way" (cp Acts 19:9).

• If you were asked: "Deny Jesus Christ or Die ?" what would you choose ?

I certainly would pray and hope to not fall short and cave in but remain faithful and NOT deny Christ, my Lord and Savior.

Monotheistic Muslims with weapons have asked this question followed by putting to death those who would not deny Jesus Christ.

And a large part of the reason of the problem is that muslims basically only know of "Christians" who claim and believe that Jesus Christ = God, this claim setting up a second God in their view which they deem to be blasphemy to be punished by death.

Muslims are actually correct in their belief that there is only ONE SINGLE SPIRIT Being/Person Who is the Almighty God ... BUT Muslims are wrong in the belief that their "Allah" is that God.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

• What is a Christian ? Historically this term came into existence to describe those who worshipped Christ = God (instead of Roman Gods). Acts 11:26

This is a claim based on a false assumption ... at the time of Acts 11, NOBODY considered Jesus = God. It was the followers of Christ, those who believed in Jesus to be the Messiah, who were called "Christian" there at Antioch ... and, by the way, this was in essence a derogatory description given to them; the regular term used was "followers of the way" (cp Acts 19:9).

• What was the reason Stephen was stoned to death in Acts 7 ?

• If you were asked: "Deny Jesus Christ or Die ?" what would you choose ?

I certainly would pray and hope to not fall short and cave in but remain faithful and NOT deny Christ, my Lord and Savior.

• How can Jesus be your Lord and Savior if Jesus is not eternal God ?

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

• What is a Christian ? Historically this term came into existence to describe those who worshipped Christ = God (instead of Roman Gods). Acts 11:26

This is a claim based on a false assumption ... at the time of Acts 11, NOBODY considered Jesus = God. It was the followers of Christ, those who believed in Jesus to be the Messiah, who were called "Christian" there at Antioch ... and, by the way, this was in essence a derogatory description given to them; the regular term used was "followers of the way" (cp Acts 19:9).

• What was the reason Stephen was stoned to death in Acts 7 ?

Those who stoned him had been confronted by him for their unbelief and rebellion against their God and His law, His prophets and His Messiah.

If you want to single out the vision Stephen had, then fine ... but note, in the vision Stephen did NOT see a 2nd God person in heaven ... rather he saw the resurrected and ascended SON OF MAN.

• If you were asked: "Deny Jesus Christ or Die ?" what would you choose ?

I certainly would pray and hope to not fall short and cave in but remain faithful and NOT deny Christ, my Lord and Savior.

• How can Jesus be your personal Lord and Savior if Jesus is not eternal God ?

Very simple ... if he were the eternal God, He could not have been and would not have been the Messiah who gave his life! The eternal God can NOT die .. is that not clear to you?

Also, does your Bible read in Acts 2, that God made Himself both Lord and Christ??

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

• What is a Christian ? Historically this term came into existence to describe those who worshipped Christ = God (instead of Roman Gods). Acts 11:26

This is a claim based on a false assumption ... at the time of Acts 11, NOBODY considered Jesus = God. It was the followers of Christ, those who believed in Jesus to be the Messiah, who were called "Christian" there at Antioch ... and, by the way, this was in essence a derogatory description given to them; the regular term used was "followers of the way" (cp Acts 19:9).

• What was the reason Stephen was stoned to death in Acts 7 ?

Those who stoned him had been confronted by him for their unbelief and rebellion against their God and His law, His prophets and His Messiah.

Wicked men in the Sanhedrin had the same reaction for Stephen (as they previously had for Jesus) when referring to the right hand of God => put them to death.

If you want to single out the vision Stephen had, then fine ... but note, in the vision Stephen did NOT see a 2nd God person in heaven ... rather he saw the resurrected and ascended SON OF MAN.

Puzzled by interpretation of Stephen's vision so "only" after the resurrection are two rulers on God's Throne in heaven ?
Thankful for ascended "Son of Man" & "Son of God" returning to His Throne on the right hand of God, which existed before creation. Personally believe the right hand throne of God was unoccupied when The Word (God) became flesh (human) and dwelled (lived) among us. John 1:14

• If you were asked: "Deny Jesus Christ or Die ?" what would you choose ?

I certainly would pray and hope to not fall short and cave in but remain faithful and NOT deny Christ, my Lord and Savior.

• How can Jesus be your personal Lord and Savior if Jesus is not eternal God ?

Very simple ... if he were the eternal God, He could not have been and would not have been the Messiah who gave his life! The eternal God can NOT die .. is that not clear to you?

Is the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty (who designed/created this world and time) limited ? Could Lord God Almighty have designed a way for The Will (Father) to rule in heaven while The Word (Son) became the Holy sacrifice on earth ?
John 10:17 (NIV) The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again.

Also, does your Bible read in Acts 2, that God made Himself both Lord and Christ??

Yes according to God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge. Amazing were wicked men in the Jewish Sanhedrin who clearly understanding "Jesus = God" so had Jesus put to death for blasphemy.

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

• What was the reason Stephen was stoned to death in Acts 7 ?

Those who stoned him had been confronted by him for their unbelief and rebellion against their God and His law, His prophets and His Messiah.

Wicked men in the Sanhedrin had the same reaction for Stephen (as they previously had for Jesus) when referring to the right hand of God => put them to death.

?? and what are you trying to prove or say with this?

If you want to single out the vision Stephen had, then fine ... but note, in the vision Stephen did NOT see a 2nd God person in heaven ... rather he saw the resurrected and ascended SON OF MAN.

Puzzled by interpretation of Stephen's vision so "only" after the resurrection are two rulers on God's Throne in heaven ?

?? what interpretation of Stepehen's vision? Does the text not clearly say "Son of Man"??

Thankful for ascended "Son of Man" & "Son of God" returning to His Throne on the right hand of God, which existed before creation. Personally believe the right hand throne of God was unoccupied when The Word (God) became flesh (human) and dwelled (lived) among us. John 1:14

Now, that's a puzzling interpretation Where is there a mention in Scripture of a "right hand THRONE of God"? Also, Stephen said he saw the Son of man STANDING at the right hand of God ... nothing about Son of Man sitting on a throne.

• How can Jesus be your personal Lord and Savior if Jesus is not eternal God ?

Very simple ... if he were the eternal God, He could not have been and would not have been the Messiah who gave his life! The eternal God can NOT die .. is that not clear to you?

Is the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty (who designed/created this world and time) limited ?

What does this question have to do with what we are talking about? Did someone even say something about the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty?

Could Lord God Almighty have designed a way for The Will (Father) to rule in heaven while The Word (Son) became the Holy sacrifice on earth ?

Your replies are quite often full of speculation ... when really you should be concentrating on what Scripture says.

John 10:17 (NIV) The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again.

?? Yes ... and what does this have to do with out current topic?

Also, does your Bible read in Acts 2, that God made Himself both Lord and Christ??

Yes according to God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge.

Ah ha ... and where in Acts 2 does the text say that God made Himself both Lord and Christ?

Amazing were wicked men in the Jewish Sanhedrin who clearly understanding "Jesus = God" so had Jesus put to death for blasphemy.

And from where do you get this idea? Is it again from speculative ideas in your mind rather than what Scripture actually does say??? There is NO indication nor plain statement in Scripture which tells us what you claim here. The Sanhedrin was rejecting Jesus as being the promised Messiah, that man who was the prophesied descendant of Abraham and David ... the idea of any human person to be GOD would be regarded as totally crazy and any man claiming such would have just been declared loony rather than being a blasphemer.

C Mc

Brethren,
Review earlier post on the little book at hand. So, now, let's continue to mine 1 John for the complete message of the writer to the original audience to know Jesus as Lord. This is better than cherry picking words to support a one's favorite dogma.

We have, however, fallen out of loving harmony with God, and sin has become our reality. John repeatedly warns us in his epistle not to sin. One of his primary concerns is that we overcome sin (in the brief letter we find 28 references to sin). But how can we do that? His advice is twofold:

1. Admit you are a sinner. If you claim you are not, you are a liar, fooling yourself (1 John 1:8,10; 2:4,9; 4:20).
2. Focus on loving God and loving others (1 John 3:14,18; 4:7-12,19-21; 5:2-3), not on loving the world or idols (2:15-17; 3:1,13; 4:3-5; 5:21).

The frequency test of keywords used in 1 John reveals another insight. When John speaks of God or when he addresses the readers, he uses family terms. Please note:

• "Son" – 22 times
• "Brother" – 15 times
• "Children – 14 times
• "Father" – 12 times
• "Dear" – 6 times

Less than every 20th word in John’s epistle is a term that comes from a family/community circle and is relational/interpersonal. John writes this epistle as an old man and in this epistle, he appears to summarize the most essential principles of being a Christian believer.

John also describes God a light (1 John 1:5). The same as God Himself is light and God is in the light, so we should walk in the light (1:7). According to John, to walk in light means to walk with God and to love others (1 John 2:8,10). Dwelling in the light means having a fellowship with God and one another, to bond and relate well with each other. John clearly wants to make a sharp distinction of God’s reality versus that of the world, so he repeatedly uses contrasts: love versus hate; love versus fear; light versus darkness.

This is also how he uses the term “truth:” truth versus lies. When he refers to the term “truth” (11 times), he speaks primarily in terms of practical life. We should live by the truth (1:6), truth should be seen in us (2:8), we should know the truth (2:21). One asks whether John had in mind Jesus’ words “I am the Truth” (John 14:6) when he uttered that we “belong to truth.” Again, his concern was that we do not love merely by lip service, but by “actions and in truth. This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence” (1 John 3:17-19). Truth versus lies is a matter of lifestyle rather than a matter of merely correct/incorrect information.

Knowledge is also important. The verb “to know” is actually one of the most frequently used verbs in John’s epistle (41 times). He does not seem to refer to fundamental/distinct beliefs as we are used to. He only expands his major concept of love and light as opposed to hatred, fear, and darkness. Knowing God means to love Him and have an intimate, personal relationship with Him (1 John 2:4). Knowledge of truth is helpful/makes sense/brings life only in the context of love and the Spirit because the “Spirit is the truth” (1 John 5:6). John’s argument throughout the epistle regarding the quality of Christian life is overwhelmingly relational.

Truth found truth shared. CM

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

• What was the reason Stephen was stoned to death in Acts 7 ?

Those who stoned him had been confronted by him for their unbelief and rebellion against their God and His law, His prophets and His Messiah.

Wicked men in the Sanhedrin had the same reaction for Stephen (as they previously had for Jesus) when referring to the right hand of God => put them to death.

?? and what are you trying to prove or say with this?

Wikipedia has "Shooting the messenger" that describes similar anger reaction to words not liked by the ruling receiver. Wealthy wicked Jewish hearers of Jesus and Stephen (in the Sanhedrin) put them to death for quoting Psalm 110 with Jesus = God. "The Lord says to my Lord..."

If you want to single out the vision Stephen had, then fine ... but note, in the vision Stephen did NOT see a 2nd God person in heaven ... rather he saw the resurrected and ascended SON OF MAN.

Puzzled by interpretation of Stephen's vision so "only" after the resurrection are two rulers on God's Throne in heaven ?

?? what interpretation of Stepehen's vision? Does the text not clearly say "Son of Man"??

IS THE MESSIAH THE SON OF GOD OR THE SON OF MAN … OR BOTH?
The New Testament presents Yeshua as both the “Son of God” and the “Son of Man.” Mark begins his Gospel referring to him as the “Son of God” (1:1), using the old title for the king of the Davidic dynasty. Yet in Mark 2:28, he refers to him as the “Son of Man.” Both titles are used for Yeshua throughout the New Testament. Some say that “Son of God” refers to his deity and “Son of Man” his humanity. That seems logical, but based on Daniel 7, the source of these expressions, there is a different picture.
Written several centuries before the Messiah appeared, Dani’el had a vision of two divine figures on two thrones: an older looking figure called “The Ancient One,” and another referred to as “one like a son of man.” It was only later that this became the title “Son of Man.”
According to Dani’el’s vision, this Son of Man, in the form of a human being, is brought on the clouds of heaven and will be given eternal rule over Isra’el. The Son of Man—who was divine but in human form and was given sovereignty over the earth—became identified with God. So when the term “Son of Man” was used, based on its genesis in the book of Daniel, deity was often in the mind of the speaker or author. That God “our Father” would have a “second in command” is an old theological thought in Isra’el. Both titles therefore can be applied to Yeshua: “Son of Man” more to his deity and “Son of God” to his humanity, the opposite of what most people think.

Barry Rubin, ed., The Complete Jewish Study Bible: Notes (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Bibles; Messianic Jewish Publishers & Resources, 2016), 1444.

Thankful for ascended "Son of Man" & "Son of God" returning to His Throne on the right hand of God, which existed before creation. Personally believe the right hand throne of God was unoccupied when The Word (God) became flesh (human) and dwelled (lived) among us. John 1:14

Now, that's a puzzling interpretation Where is there a mention in Scripture of a "right hand THRONE of God"? Also, Stephen said he saw the Son of man STANDING at the right hand of God ... nothing about Son of Man sitting on a throne.

      1      Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
      2      a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.

New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update (La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Heb 8:1–2.

• How can Jesus be your personal Lord and Savior if Jesus is not eternal God ?

Very simple ... if he were the eternal God, He could not have been and would not have been the Messiah who gave his life! The eternal God can NOT die .. is that not clear to you?

Is the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty (who designed/created this world and time) limited ?

What does this question have to do with what we are talking about? Did someone even say something about the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty?

My perspective seems to be reading your belief of Lord God Almighty as being One that has power flowing out while denying personalities (mind & choice) of Jesus Christ and Holy Spirit ("the mind of the Holy Spirit" in Romans 8:27). The personalities in the Lord God Almighty intimately share One Spirit (essence) while having three personalities who simultaneously choose to truly Love each other.

Could Lord God Almighty have designed a way for The Will (Father) to rule in heaven while The Word (Son) became the Holy sacrifice on earth ?

Your replies are quite often full of speculation ... when really you should be concentrating on what Scripture says.

Serious scripture question is "Could Lord God Almighty have designed (planned) a way for The Will (Father) to rule in heaven while The Word (Son) became the Holy sacrifice on earth ?" ("In the beginning" = before creation). Genesis 1 uses Elohim (plural) form for God who has One Image (life breathed into Adam). Greek grammar lesson learned for John 1:1 is all of The Word being God (in the beginning) while God is more than The Word.

John 10:17 (NIV) The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again.

?? Yes ... and what does this have to do with out current topic?

Jesus knew He was God who had the authority to resurrect His Holy dead body from the grave. Spirit of God in Jesus kept existing when body died (Jesus quoted Psalm 31:5)

Also, does your Bible read in Acts 2, that God made Himself both Lord and Christ??

Yes according to God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge.

Ah ha ... and where in Acts 2 does the text say that God made Himself both Lord and Christ?

22      “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know—
      23      this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
      24      “But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power.
      25      “For David says of Him,
     ‘I SAW THE LORD ALWAYS IN MY PRESENCE;
     FOR HE IS AT MY RIGHT HAND, SO THAT I WILL NOT BE SHAKEN.
           26      ‘THEREFORE MY HEART WAS GLAD AND MY TONGUE EXULTED;
     MOREOVER MY FLESH ALSO WILL LIVE IN HOPE;
           27      BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO HADES,
     NOR ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.
           28      ‘YOU HAVE MADE KNOWN TO ME THE WAYS OF LIFE;
     YOU WILL MAKE ME FULL OF GLADNESS WITH YOUR PRESENCE.’
      29      “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
      30      “And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
      31      he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY.
      32      “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.
      33      “Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.
      34      “For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says:
     ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,
     “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
           35      UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.” ’
      36      “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that **God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”**

New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update (La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Ac 2:22–36.

Amazing were wicked men in the Jewish Sanhedrin who clearly understanding "Jesus = God" so had Jesus put to death for blasphemy.

And from where do you get this idea? Is it again from speculative ideas in your mind rather than what Scripture actually does say??? There is NO indication nor plain statement in Scripture which tells us what you claim here. The Sanhedrin was rejecting Jesus as being the promised Messiah, that man who was the prophesied descendant of Abraham and David ... the idea of any human person to be GOD would be regarded as totally crazy and any man claiming such would have just been declared loony rather than being a blasphemer.

Please refer to above Jewish insight from Daniel 7 about Messiah being both God ("Son of Man") and Man ("Son of God"). Reaction of Caiaphas showed he believed Jesus deserved to die for blasphemy because Jesus answered Caiaphas in a way that communicated Jesus = God. Matthew 26:57-68

Keep Smiling

C Mc

Here is Trinitarian History To Consider:

The bishops gathered together to determine correct belief and teaching-- the first concerning Christology and the Trinity - "the teaching authority of the church" what was referred to was indeed "the teaching authority of the bishops." At times the orthodoxy of one council became heresy for a later one, and vice-versa. For instance:

1. The Council of Ephesus (431) condemned Nestorius’ sharp distinction between two natures in Christ.
2. The Council in Ephesus (449) vindicated Eutyches' monophysitism and condemned any reference to two natures after Christ's birth.
3. The Council of Chalcedon (451) rejected monophysitism and defined as orthodox the position which teaches two natures coexisting in one person.

Truth found truth shared. CM

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

Wikipedia has "Shooting the messenger" that describes similar anger reaction to words not liked by the ruling receiver. Wealthy wicked Jewish hearers of Jesus and Stephen (in the Sanhedrin) put them to death for quoting Psalm 110 with Jesus = God. "The Lord says to my Lord..."

Psa 110 says nothing about Jesus=God ... unless you want to make the 2 "Lords" mentioned to be TWO GODS ???

?? what interpretation of Stepehen's vision? Does the text not clearly say "Son of Man"??

IS THE MESSIAH THE SON OF GOD OR THE SON OF MAN … OR BOTH?

Both .. and BOTH are terms used for the HUMAN BEING, the MAN Jesus.

The New Testament presents Yeshua as both the “Son of God” and the “Son of Man.” Mark begins his Gospel referring to him as the “Son of God” (1:1), using the old title for the king of the Davidic dynasty. Yet in Mark 2:28, he refers to him as the “Son of Man.” Both titles are used for Yeshua throughout the New Testament. Some say that “Son of God” refers to his deity and “Son of Man” his humanity. That seems logical, but based on Daniel 7, the source of these expressions, there is a different picture.
Written several centuries before the Messiah appeared, Dani’el had a vision of two divine figures on two thrones: an older looking figure called “The Ancient One,” and another referred to as “one like a son of man.” It was only later that this became the title “Son of Man.”
According to Dani’el’s vision, this Son of Man, in the form of a human being, is brought on the clouds of heaven and will be given eternal rule over Isra’el. The Son of Man—who was divine but in human form and was given sovereignty over the earth—became identified with God. So when the term “Son of Man” was used, based on its genesis in the book of Daniel, deity was often in the mind of the speaker or author. That God “our Father” would have a “second in command” is an old theological thought in Isra’el. Both titles therefore can be applied to Yeshua: “Son of Man” more to his deity and “Son of God” to his humanity, the opposite of what most people think.

Nowhere do these OT passages make "the son of God" to actually be God Himself.

Now, that's a puzzling interpretation Where is there a mention in Scripture of a "right hand THRONE of God"? Also, Stephen said he saw the Son of man STANDING at the right hand of God ... nothing about Son of Man sitting on a throne.

1 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.

I suppose for you "at the right side of the throne" means ON the throne ??
Why do you not read more carefully instead?

What does this question have to do with what we are talking about? Did someone even say something about the Spirit of the Lord God Almighty?

My perspective seems to be reading your belief of Lord God Almighty as being One that has power flowing out while denying personalities (mind & choice) of Jesus Christ and Holy Spirit ("the mind of the Holy Spirit" in Romans 8:27). The personalities in the Lord God Almighty intimately share One Spirit (essence) while having three personalities who simultaneously choose to truly Love each other.

??? what you write here appears confused ...

Your replies are quite often full of speculation ... when really you should be concentrating on what Scripture says.

Serious scripture question is "Could Lord God Almighty have designed (planned) a way for The Will (Father) to rule in heaven while The Word (Son) became the Holy sacrifice on earth ?" ("In the beginning" = before creation). Genesis 1 uses Elohim (plural) form for God who has One Image (life breathed into Adam). Greek grammar lesson learned for John 1:1 is all of The Word being God (in the beginning) while God is more than The Word.

???? More confused ideas ...

John 10:17 (NIV) The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again.

?? Yes ... and what does this have to do with out current topic?

Jesus knew He was God who had the authority to resurrect His Holy dead body from the grave. Spirit of God in Jesus kept existing when body died (Jesus quoted Psalm 31:5)

??? speculation and confused ideas ...
You also seem to claim that the man Jesus actually did not really die ??

Ah ha ... and where in Acts 2 does the text say that God made Himself both Lord and Christ?

22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know—
23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
24 “But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power.
25 “For David says of Him,
‘I SAW THE LORD ALWAYS IN MY PRESENCE;
FOR HE IS AT MY RIGHT HAND, SO THAT I WILL NOT BE SHAKEN.
26 ‘THEREFORE MY HEART WAS GLAD AND MY TONGUE EXULTED;
MOREOVER MY FLESH ALSO WILL LIVE IN HOPE;
27 BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO HADES,
NOR ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.
28 ‘YOU HAVE MADE KNOWN TO ME THE WAYS OF LIFE;
YOU WILL MAKE ME FULL OF GLADNESS WITH YOUR PRESENCE.’
29 “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
30 “And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
31 he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY.
32 “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.
33 “Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.
34 “For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says:
‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,
“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
35 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.” ’
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”

And with quoting the whole passage you just showed that nowhere in these verses does the record in Acts 2 that God made Himself both Lord and Christ.
Unfortunately, you seem to not be able to actually see what you read.

And from where do you get this idea? Is it again from speculative ideas in your mind rather than what Scripture actually does say??? There is NO indication nor plain statement in Scripture which tells us what you claim here. The Sanhedrin was rejecting Jesus as being the promised Messiah, that man who was the prophesied descendant of Abraham and David ... the idea of any human person to be GOD would be regarded as totally crazy and any man claiming such would have just been declared loony rather than being a blasphemer.

Please refer to above Jewish insight from Daniel 7 about Messiah being both God ("Son of Man") and Man ("Son of God"). Reaction of Caiaphas showed he believed Jesus deserved to die for blasphemy because Jesus answered Caiaphas in a way that communicated Jesus = God. Matthew 26:57-68

All the verses you quoted and/or claimed to be Jewish insight about the Messiah being God are not what Scripture states ... they are only what YOU read into the texts you read.

Keep Smiling

I see more reason for you to not smiling

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
Keep Smiling

I see more reason for you to not smiling

Please ask God to open your eyes to the wonders of His Word (Psalm 119:18) followed by reading Proverbs 25:20 (to a heavy heart, my Joyful words are received as cheerful singing, which stings). Also please pray then read Matthew 7:3-5 since a number of your directives for me have reflexive insight (what upsets us in others reflects what is hurting inside, which displeases God).

This morning my heart was singing a joyful tune with childlike love for God
Wonders of God to Praise
let every voice proclaim
He is our God today
Hallelujah Sing & Praise

Thankful for personally experiencing Ephesians 5:15-20 that includes being Thankful for CD discussions My Smile reflects my obedience choice for Philippians 4:4 and 1 Thessalonians 5:16 (numbered Greek sentence has two words). Thankful for One Loving God who has three persons so we can spiritually embrace for a wonderful group hug

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
Please ask God to open your eyes to the wonders of His Word (Psalm 119:18) followed by reading Proverbs 25:20 (to a heavy heart, my Joyful words are received as cheerful singing, which stings).

You know, more than 4 decades ago, I asked God to open my eyes and help me understand the Holy Trinity doctrine which supposedly was taught in the Bible ... God answered my prayer by showing me that He is not a Three, and that He had not inspired any writer of the Scriptures to write anything about a Trinity theology.
At first I was somewhat in disbelief ... but careful reading of the Scriptures proved exactly what my eyes had been opened to see.

This morning my heart was singing a joyful tune with childlike love for God
Wonders of God to Praise
let every voice proclaim
He is our God today
Hallelujah Sing & Praise

Wonderful ... how does that relate to our study of the Scriptures which do not teach a Holy Trinity ?

Thankful for personally experiencing Ephesians 5:15-20 that includes being Thankful for CD discussions My Smile reflects my obedience choice for Philippians 4:4 and 1 Thessalonians 5:16 (numbered Greek sentence has two words).

Well said ...

Thankful for One Loving God who has three persons so we can spiritually embrace for a wonderful group hug

So "God" to you is actually a GROUP or TRIO ...sort of like a "Swimmer-team" with "three swimmers" (or in this case of your "God-Team", a team of "three Gods".

C Mc

.> @Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

Wikipedia has "Shooting the messenger" that describes similar anger reaction to words not liked by the ruling receiver. Wealthy wicked Jewish hearers of Jesus and Stephen (in the Sanhedrin) put them to death for quoting Psalm 110 with Jesus = God. "The Lord says to my Lord..."

Psa 110 says nothing about Jesus=God ... unless you want to make the 2 "Lords" mentioned to be TWO GODS ???

Wolfgang,
Before you dismiss Ps 110 as having nothing to do with Jesus review the collective Scripture and other scholars on the passage:

The Davidic dynasty came from the tribe of Judah, while the regular priesthood was hereditary only through the tribe of Levi. The two offices were never united in Israel’s history; they were entirely separate (see Num 8:19; 2 Chr 26:16–20; 1 Sam 13:9, 14). The promise of Ps 110:4 can, therefore, refer only to the Messiah. This is confirmed by the superscription of the psalm, which assigns the whole poem to David as the author, an important formal witness. To these evidences, we could add the testimonies of certain Jewish interpreters. Decisive for us are, however, the declarations of Jesus Christ and His apostles. Jesus’ citation of Ps 110:1—to prove that the Messiah was not only the son of David but also the Lord of David (Mark 12:35–37)—would have been powerless to his hearers if the messianic understanding of Ps 110 was not generally assumed. An old Jewish interpretation (Targum) of Ps 110:4 supports the conclusion that in the time of Jesus some rabbis applied Ps 110 to a future David or Messiah (documentation in D. M. Hay, Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity, Soc. of Bib. Lit. Mon. 18 [Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon Press, 1973], Ch. 1).

Denying that He was a national-political Messiah—as was expected in the current Jewish hope—Christ interpreted His messiahship in terms of the Son of Man in Daniel 7 and of the Lord of David in Psalm 110. In Christ’s understanding, both prophetic passages were messianic; both connected the Messiah with the throne of God and His receiving rulership over the earth.

Christ obviously based His interpretation on the premise that Psalm 110 was written by David himself. This implies that King David acknowledged two divine persons above himself: Yahweh and his Lord, the Messiah (‘Adoni, “my Lord”). A modern translation, therefore, renders the text as: “This is Yahweh’s oracle to my Sovereign Lord” (The Psalms by B. Zerr, O.S.B., Paulist Press, 1979).

Christ expressed His conviction again when He challenged the Jews: “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’?” (Matt 22:43). Christ’s references to Psalm 110:1 (Matt 22:43; 26:64) show that this psalm formed a basic pillar of His own understanding of Messiahship. Christ’s hope of sitting at the right hand of God as the eternal Priest-King came in glaring conflict with the Jewish hope for a national political Messiah.

Wolfgang, could there be a chance, you don't know it all? Truth found truth shared. CM

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:
.> @Wolfgang said:

Psa 110 says nothing about Jesus=God ... unless you want to make the 2 "Lords" mentioned to be TWO GODS ???

Wolfgang,
Before you dismiss Ps 110 as having nothing to do with Jesus review the collective Scripture and other scholars on the passage:

C_M,
where did I dismiss Ps 110 s having nothing to do with Jesus ????

You know, those who read carefully and accurately do have an advantage Please read more carefully what I had said concerning Ps 110 (see quote above) ... perhaps you will actually see what I did write.

**Wolfgang, could there be a chance, you don't know it all?

Did I ever claim that I did? Why are you insinuating such here?

See above ... those who read carefully and accurately do have an advantage

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
Please ask God to open your eyes to the wonders of His Word (Psalm 119:18) followed by reading Proverbs 25:20 (to a heavy heart, my Joyful words are received as cheerful singing, which stings).

You know, more than 4 decades ago, I asked God to open my eyes and help me understand the Holy Trinity doctrine which supposedly was taught in the Bible ... God answered my prayer by showing me that He is not a Three, and that He had not inspired any writer of the Scriptures to write anything about a Trinity theology.
At first I was somewhat in disbelief ... but careful reading of the Scriptures proved exactly what my eyes had been opened to see.

Curious if the one teaching you decades ago included insight into God's Love, Mercy, & Grace ?
Contrasting teaching example is my past hearing a strange voice in my head urging me to commit suicide twice.

This morning my heart was singing a joyful tune with childlike love for God
Wonders of God to Praise
let every voice proclaim
He is our God today
Hallelujah Sing & Praise

Wonderful ... how does that relate to our study of the Scriptures which do not teach a Holy Trinity ?

Thankful for my spirit & thoughts interacting with God's Holy Spirit in me so we can Praise God together Words fail to convey wondrous magnitude of Holy Righteous Fruit: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Humility, Self-Control Serious study for each Fruit aspect showed other(s) nearby. For example, 1st Corinthians 13 includes them all.

Thankful for personally experiencing Ephesians 5:15-20 that includes being Thankful for CD discussions My Smile reflects my obedience choice for Philippians 4:4 and 1 Thessalonians 5:16 (numbered Greek sentence has two words).

Well said ...

Thankful for One Loving God who has three persons so we can spiritually embrace for a wonderful group hug

So "God" to you is actually a GROUP or TRIO ...sort of like a "Swimmer-team" with "three swimmers" (or in this case of your "God-Team", a team of "three Gods".

Analogy of three swimmer team is inappropriate (tritheism) since each swimmer has a body (image), a spirit, a soul, a mind, and a will (free choice). My God has one image, one spirit, & one soul, which are intimately shared by three mind/will personalities who truly Love each other
Searching Logos Bible software for ([field heading,largetext] trinitarian,trinity) WITHIN 111 WORDS council included 31 results in The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise that is a public domain resource (with NIHIL OBSTAT. and IMPRIMATUR.) whose Introductory Remarks are:

1. It belongs to the first treatise of Dogmatic Theology (De Deo Uno) to show that God is one and personal. The pantheistic fiction of an impersonal God is sufficiently exploded by the Almighty’s own solemn declaration (Gen. 3:14): “I am Who am.”

Whether the infinite personality of God must be conceived as simple or multiplex, is a matter which human reason cannot determine unaided. On the strength of the inductive axiom, “Quot sunt naturae, tot sunt personae,” we should rather be tempted to attribute but one personality to the one Divine Nature. Positive Revelation tells us, however, that there are in God three really distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This fundamental dogma, which essentially differentiates the Christian conception of God from that of the Pagans, the Jews, and the Mohammedans, is designated in the technical Latin of the Church as “Trinitas,” a term first used, so far as we know, by Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd Century) and Tertullian, (197-222) and which later became current in ecclesiastical usage and was embodied in the Creeds. In the private symbolum of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus mention is made of a “perfect Triad” (τριὰς τελεία). Didymus the Blind, Cyril of Alexandria, Hilary, Ambrose, and Augustine have written separate treatises “On the Trinity.”

2. Unity, simplicity, and unicity are as essential to the mystery of the Blessed Trinity as the concept of triunity itself. Hence it is not surprising that all these momenta were equally emphasized by the early Fathers.

Thus we read in the Athanasian Creed: “Ita ut per omnia … et unitas in Trinitate, et Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit—So that in all things … the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.” The first canon of the Lateran Council held under Pope Martin the First reads thus: “Si quis secundum sanctos Patres non confitetur proprie et veraciter Patrem, et Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, Trinitatem in unitate et unitatem in Trinitate … condemnatus sit—If any one does not with the Holy Fathers profess properly and truly the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity, let him be anathema.” If we pay special regard to the note of threeness, the Trinity presents itself mainly as a threefold personality in one Divine Nature. If, on the other hand, we accentuate the note of unity, the Trinity presents itself as Triunity (triunitas), a term which expresses the numeric unity of the Godhead common to all three Divine Hypostases. Both points of view are not only legitimate in themselves, but demanded by the nature of the mystery and the heretical distortions to which it has been subjected. As against those Antitrinitarians who (like the Monarchians, the Sabellians, and the Subordinationists) exaggerate the notion of unity so as to deny a true and immanent Trinity in the Godhead, Dogmatic Theology has to prove the existence of three really distinct Persons. In refuting the opposite heresy of Tritheism, which exaggerates the notion of threeness and postulates three separate divine natures, substances, or essences, it is necessary to show that the Divine Trinity is a Triunity.

3. Antitrinitarianism in both of its antithetical forms is by no means a thing of the past, but under various guises still has numerous adherents.

Whilst the few remaining partisans of Günther’s theological system continue to teach a sort of veiled Tritheism, present-day Socinians, Unitarians, and Rationalists move entirely within the circle of the heretical notions of Sabellius. Kantian Rationalism debases the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity by treating it as a mere symbol indicative of the power, wisdom, and love of God. The school of Hegel pantheistically explains the Father as “das Ansichsein des Absoluten,” (the beingness of the absolute) the Son as “das Anderssein des Absoluten in der Welt,” (the otherness of the absolute in the world) and the Holy Ghost as “die Rückkehr des Absoluten zu sich selber im menschlichen Selbstbewusstsein” (the return of the Absolute to oneself in human self-consciousness)—for the meaning of which obscure phrases we must refer the reader to the learned author of The Secret of Hegel. Schleiermacher does not deny the Trinity, but according to him it is such an unessential “mode of existence of the Divine Being” that he has acted wisely in relegating it to the appendix of his Glaubenslehre. The position of liberal Protestant theology at the present day is well stated by Adolph Harnack when he says: “Already in the second century Christ’s [natural] birth into this world assumed the rank of a supernatural, and later on that of an eternal generation, and the fact of being begotten, or passive generation itself, became the characteristic note of the second Person [in the Blessed Trinity]. Similarly, in the fourth century the promised [temporal] ‘mission’ of the Holy Ghost assumed the character of an ‘eternal mission’ and became the discriminating badge of the third Person within the Holy Triad. Nowhere have we a more characteristic example of what the imagination is capable of doing when it undertakes to evolve ideas.” With, the exception of the relatively few champions of Lutheran orthodoxy, whose number is, moreover, constantly dwindling, modern Protestantism no longer holds the Christian idea of the Blessed Trinity. Liberal theology is everywhere triumphing over orthodoxy. The demand, which is constantly growing louder and more widespread, even in this country, that no specific creed be imposed upon the members of any denomination, ultimately strikes at the dogma of the Holy Trinity and that of the Divinity of Christ. Among German divines Krüger confesses this quite openly. Catholic theology, which alone upholds the banner of true Christian belief, in asserting and defending the dogma of the Trinity finds it necessary above all to demonstrate by the modern scientific method that this dogma is truly and clearly revealed by God, that it is solidly founded in Christian Tradition, and that it does not, as unbelievers allege, involve a contradiction.

4. Since theistic philosophy is unable to establish this dogma on the basis of unaided human reason, the Catholic theologian is compelled to adhere closely to the teaching of the Church. He must first believe; then he may inquire.

The most perfect and complete Trinitarian formula that has come down to us from Patristic times is that composed by the Eleventh Council of Toledo, A. D. 675. We prefer to base our exposition on the briefer and more perspicuous formula contained in the Athanasian Creed, which has the additional advantage of being vested with the primary authority due to an ancient Christian symbol. The dogma of the Most Holy Trinity is there set forth in the following terms: “Fides catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trinitatem in unitate veneremur; neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam separantes; alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia (et) Spiritus Sancti; sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna maiestas.… Pater a nullo est factus nec creatus nec genitus. Filius a Patre solo est, non factus nec creatus, sed genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nec creatus nec genitus, sed procedens—The Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.… The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.”
The chief points of our dogma may therefore be summarized thus: In essence, substance, and nature there is but one God. However, the Divine Nature does not subsist in one single Person or Hypostasis, but in three distinct Persons, i. e., Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Three do not coalesce after the manner of mere logical momenta, but are really distinct from one another, so much so that the one is not the other. They are not distinct in virtue of their nature, which is numerically the same in all three, but solely in virtue of the relative opposition by which the Son is begotten by the Father, while the Holy Ghost proceeds alike from the Father and the Son. The mystery peculiar to this sublime dogma arises from the mutual relations of the two principal concepts—“Nature” and “Person.” Within the domain of human experience every complete nature is at the same time a separate hypostasis; in other words, every rational nature is eo ipso a distinct person. Hence the axiom, “Tot sunt hypostases, quot sunt naturae.” But this axiom has no metaphysical value, and cannot be applied to God, since Revelation expressly teaches that “Nature” and “Person” do not coincide either in reality or in conception. As we acknowledge three Persons in the one Divine Nature, so conversely we believe that there are in Christ two complete natures, the one divine, the other human, both subsisting in one and the same person, i. e., the Divine Person of the Logos-Son. This revealed truth compels Catholic philosophy to draw a sharp distinction between “Nature” and “Person,” as we shall show more fully further down.

Since the essence of the mystery consists in this that “we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity,” we may consider the Blessed Trinity first as Trinity in Unity (Trinitas in Unitate), or threefold personality; and, secondly, as Unity in Trinity (Unitas in Trinitate) or Triunity. We shall accordingly divide the subject-matter of this treatise into two parts.

Joseph Pohle and Arthur Preuss, The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise, Dogmatic Theology (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1915), 1–7.

Personal caveat is awareness of other groups who worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:
You know, more than 4 decades ago, I asked God to open my eyes and help me understand the Holy Trinity doctrine which supposedly was taught in the Bible ... God answered my prayer by showing me that He is not a Three, and that He had not inspired any writer of the Scriptures to write anything about a Trinity theology.
At first I was somewhat in disbelief ... but careful reading of the Scriptures proved exactly what my eyes had been opened to see.

Curious if the one teaching you decades ago included insight into God's Love, Mercy, & Grace ?

??? ...

Contrasting teaching example is my past hearing a strange voice in my head urging me to commit suicide twice.

??? ...

Thankful for One Loving God who has three persons so we can spiritually embrace for a wonderful group hug

So "God" to you is actually a GROUP or TRIO ...sort of like a "Swimmer-team" with "three swimmers" (or in this case of your "God-Team", a team of "three Gods".

Analogy of three swimmer team is inappropriate (tritheism) since each swimmer has a body (image), a spirit, a soul, a mind, and a will (free choice).

So you say that your three God-persons do not each have an individual personality, mind, will??

My God has one image, one spirit, & one soul, which are intimately shared by three mind/will personalities who truly Love each other

well, the three swimmers (or take any other illustration of a trio (how about musicians in a trio?) ,,, they also better be of only one mind and one purpose or else they would be divided and could not achieve much ...
Your "God" as you try and describe is in effect THREE Gods ... no matter whether you deny that fact and claim you do not adhere to "tritheism". You know, when there are peas in a can or a glass, a label saying "beans" doesn't change what is in the container.

Searching Logos Bible software for ([field heading,largetext] trinitarian,trinity) WITHIN 111 WORDS council included 31 results in The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise that is a public domain resource (with NIHIL OBSTAT. and IMPRIMATUR.) whose Introductory Remarks are:

1. It belongs to the first treatise of Dogmatic Theology (De Deo Uno) to show that God is one and personal. The pantheistic fiction of an impersonal God is sufficiently exploded by the Almighty’s own solemn declaration (Gen. 3:14): “I am Who am.”

Whether the infinite personality of God must be conceived as simple or multiplex, is a matter which human reason cannot determine unaided. On the strength of the inductive axiom, “Quot sunt naturae, tot sunt personae,” we should rather be tempted to attribute but one personality to the one Divine Nature. Positive Revelation tells us, however, that there are in God three really distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This fundamental dogma, which essentially differentiates the Christian conception of God from that of the Pagans, the Jews, and the Mohammedans, is designated in the technical Latin of the Church as “Trinitas,” a term first used, so far as we know, by Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd Century) and Tertullian, (197-222) and which later became current in ecclesiastical usage and was embodied in the Creeds. In the private symbolum of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus mention is made of a “perfect Triad” (τριὰς τελεία). Didymus the Blind, Cyril of Alexandria, Hilary, Ambrose, and Augustine have written separate treatises “On the Trinity.”

2. Unity, simplicity, and unicity are as essential to the mystery of the Blessed Trinity as the concept of triunity itself. Hence it is not surprising that all these momenta were equally emphasized by the early Fathers.

Thus we read in the Athanasian Creed: “Ita ut per omnia … et unitas in Trinitate, et Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit—So that in all things … the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.” The first canon of the Lateran Council held under Pope Martin the First reads thus: “Si quis secundum sanctos Patres non confitetur proprie et veraciter Patrem, et Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, Trinitatem in unitate et unitatem in Trinitate … condemnatus sit—If any one does not with the Holy Fathers profess properly and truly the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity, let him be anathema.” If we pay special regard to the note of threeness, the Trinity presents itself mainly as a threefold personality in one Divine Nature. If, on the other hand, we accentuate the note of unity, the Trinity presents itself as Triunity (triunitas), a term which expresses the numeric unity of the Godhead common to all three Divine Hypostases. Both points of view are not only legitimate in themselves, but demanded by the nature of the mystery and the heretical distortions to which it has been subjected. As against those Antitrinitarians who (like the Monarchians, the Sabellians, and the Subordinationists) exaggerate the notion of unity so as to deny a true and immanent Trinity in the Godhead, Dogmatic Theology has to prove the existence of three really distinct Persons. In refuting the opposite heresy of Tritheism, which exaggerates the notion of threeness and postulates three separate divine natures, substances, or essences, it is necessary to show that the Divine Trinity is a Triunity.

3. Antitrinitarianism in both of its antithetical forms is by no means a thing of the past, but under various guises still has numerous adherents.

Whilst the few remaining partisans of Günther’s theological system continue to teach a sort of veiled Tritheism, present-day Socinians, Unitarians, and Rationalists move entirely within the circle of the heretical notions of Sabellius. Kantian Rationalism debases the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity by treating it as a mere symbol indicative of the power, wisdom, and love of God. The school of Hegel pantheistically explains the Father as “das Ansichsein des Absoluten,” (the beingness of the absolute) the Son as “das Anderssein des Absoluten in der Welt,” (the otherness of the absolute in the world) and the Holy Ghost as “die Rückkehr des Absoluten zu sich selber im menschlichen Selbstbewusstsein” (the return of the Absolute to oneself in human self-consciousness)—for the meaning of which obscure phrases we must refer the reader to the learned author of The Secret of Hegel. Schleiermacher does not deny the Trinity, but according to him it is such an unessential “mode of existence of the Divine Being” that he has acted wisely in relegating it to the appendix of his Glaubenslehre. The position of liberal Protestant theology at the present day is well stated by Adolph Harnack when he says: “Already in the second century Christ’s [natural] birth into this world assumed the rank of a supernatural, and later on that of an eternal generation, and the fact of being begotten, or passive generation itself, became the characteristic note of the second Person [in the Blessed Trinity]. Similarly, in the fourth century the promised [temporal] ‘mission’ of the Holy Ghost assumed the character of an ‘eternal mission’ and became the discriminating badge of the third Person within the Holy Triad. Nowhere have we a more characteristic example of what the imagination is capable of doing when it undertakes to evolve ideas.” With, the exception of the relatively few champions of Lutheran orthodoxy, whose number is, moreover, constantly dwindling, modern Protestantism no longer holds the Christian idea of the Blessed Trinity. Liberal theology is everywhere triumphing over orthodoxy. The demand, which is constantly growing louder and more widespread, even in this country, that no specific creed be imposed upon the members of any denomination, ultimately strikes at the dogma of the Holy Trinity and that of the Divinity of Christ. Among German divines Krüger confesses this quite openly. Catholic theology, which alone upholds the banner of true Christian belief, in asserting and defending the dogma of the Trinity finds it necessary above all to demonstrate by the modern scientific method that this dogma is truly and clearly revealed by God, that it is solidly founded in Christian Tradition, and that it does not, as unbelievers allege, involve a contradiction.

4. Since theistic philosophy is unable to establish this dogma on the basis of unaided human reason, the Catholic theologian is compelled to adhere closely to the teaching of the Church. He must first believe; then he may inquire.

The most perfect and complete Trinitarian formula that has come down to us from Patristic times is that composed by the Eleventh Council of Toledo, A. D. 675. We prefer to base our exposition on the briefer and more perspicuous formula contained in the Athanasian Creed, which has the additional advantage of being vested with the primary authority due to an ancient Christian symbol. The dogma of the Most Holy Trinity is there set forth in the following terms: “Fides catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trinitatem in unitate veneremur; neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam separantes; alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia (et) Spiritus Sancti; sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna maiestas.… Pater a nullo est factus nec creatus nec genitus. Filius a Patre solo est, non factus nec creatus, sed genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nec creatus nec genitus, sed procedens—The Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.… The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.”
The chief points of our dogma may therefore be summarized thus: In essence, substance, and nature there is but one God. However, the Divine Nature does not subsist in one single Person or Hypostasis, but in three distinct Persons, i. e., Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Three do not coalesce after the manner of mere logical momenta, but are really distinct from one another, so much so that the one is not the other. They are not distinct in virtue of their nature, which is numerically the same in all three, but solely in virtue of the relative opposition by which the Son is begotten by the Father, while the Holy Ghost proceeds alike from the Father and the Son. The mystery peculiar to this sublime dogma arises from the mutual relations of the two principal concepts—“Nature” and “Person.” Within the domain of human experience every complete nature is at the same time a separate hypostasis; in other words, every rational nature is eo ipso a distinct person. Hence the axiom, “Tot sunt hypostases, quot sunt naturae.” But this axiom has no metaphysical value, and cannot be applied to God, since Revelation expressly teaches that “Nature” and “Person” do not coincide either in reality or in conception. As we acknowledge three Persons in the one Divine Nature, so conversely we believe that there are in Christ two complete natures, the one divine, the other human, both subsisting in one and the same person, i. e., the Divine Person of the Logos-Son. This revealed truth compels Catholic philosophy to draw a sharp distinction between “Nature” and “Person,” as we shall show more fully further down.

Since the essence of the mystery consists in this that “we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity,” we may consider the Blessed Trinity first as Trinity in Unity (Trinitas in Unitate), or threefold personality; and, secondly, as Unity in Trinity (Unitas in Trinitate) or Triunity. We shall accordingly divide the subject-matter of this treatise into two parts.

Joseph Pohle and Arthur Preuss, The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise, Dogmatic Theology (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1915), 1–7.

>
Many, many, many, many many many words which complicate (muddy the clear water) the simple teaching of Scripture with loads men's theology.

In a sense, it is nice to be able to have a quick look at what many trinity theologians have published and tried in order to "explain" their "mystery holy trinity religion" with such a tool as the Logos Bible Software ... however, these many theologies all miss the simple and clear truth that the true God of the Bible is only ONE SINGLE Person God.

Personal caveat is awareness of other groups who worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity

When I was in early grades in high school, I had some trouble in a certain subject and only received poor grades .... for a while I "encouraged" myseld with the awareness that quite a few others in the class also had the same poor grade. As I grew a little older, I became aware of the simple fact that it did not help at all no matter how many others were in the same poor grade situation ...and only then did I take the necessary and correct steps to correct my error and in turn grades improved quite a bit ... (eh, that subject was English)

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:
You know, more than 4 decades ago, I asked God to open my eyes and help me understand the Holy Trinity doctrine which supposedly was taught in the Bible ... God answered my prayer by showing me that He is not a Three, and that He had not inspired any writer of the Scriptures to write anything about a Trinity theology.
At first I was somewhat in disbelief ... but careful reading of the Scriptures proved exactly what my eyes had been opened to see.

Curious if the one teaching you decades ago included insight into God's Love, Mercy, & Grace ?

??? ...

Contrasting teaching example is my past hearing a strange voice in my head urging me to commit suicide twice.

??? ...

Suspect spirit that taught you about "monotheism" was a deceiver since that spirit did not instruct about God's Love, Mercy, and Grace. Reminds me of deceiving spirit in 1 Kings 22 that God authorized for the death of wicked King Ahab using 400 false prophets who believed they were hearing from God.

Thankful for One Loving God who has three persons so we can spiritually embrace for a wonderful group hug

So "God" to you is actually a GROUP or TRIO ...sort of like a "Swimmer-team" with "three swimmers" (or in this case of your "God-Team", a team of "three Gods".

Analogy of three swimmer team is inappropriate (tritheism) since each swimmer has a body (image), a spirit, a soul, a mind, and a will (free choice).

So you say that your three God-persons do not each have an individual personality, mind, will??

Three God-persons have individual personality (mind & will) while being One Spirit Three God-persons choose to truly Love each other always so One God is glorified

My God has one image, one spirit, & one soul, which are intimately shared by three mind/will personalities who truly Love each other

well, the three swimmers (or take any other illustration of a trio (how about musicians in a trio?) ,,, they also better be of only one mind and one purpose or else they would be divided and could not achieve much ...

Our human limitation is being in one place at one time while God's Spirit is unlimited. Concur divided kingdom will be ruined: e.g. Matthew 12:22-28 while appreciating Jesus knowing thoughts of the Pharisees (which is something God does that humans cannot).
What words can be used to describe what you believe is impossible: Eternal God's Spirit ruling in heaven while also being in human flesh ? e.g. John 1:14

Your "God" as you try and describe is in effect THREE Gods ... no matter whether you deny that fact and claim you do not adhere to "tritheism". You know, when there are peas in a can or a glass, a label saying "beans" doesn't change what is in the container.

Appears your vocabulary has Trinity = Tritheism that agrees with physical experience (limitations) while not matching spiritual reality. Concur correct label is needed. Physically cannot prove my daily spiritual experience (communion) in One God, which includes ReJoicing Always with Praise & Thanksgiving My words are inadequate for expressing magnitude of God's Love that includes His desire for an intense, intimate Love relationship with each individual God requires Faith (Forsaking All I Trust Him) to truly experience God's Love Hebrews 11:1
A man can be Three in One: Father, Husband, and Son that is usually modalism as One man focuses on One mode at a time. Some humans talking to themselves have intriguing conversations between their personalities (or demonic possessors).
One God has One Spirit interconnected in three personalities (mind & choice) loving each other My spiritual worship is usually for All of One God while some times specifically Thank a person in One God: Abba, Yeshua, or Ruach HaKodesh

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

Curious if the one teaching you decades ago included insight into God's Love, Mercy, & Grace ?

??? ...

Contrasting teaching example is my past hearing a strange voice in my head urging me to commit suicide twice.

??? ...

Suspect spirit that taught you about "monotheism" was a deceiver since that spirit did not instruct about God's Love, Mercy, and Grace.

How do you know? Is it your speculation spirit that you listen to??

Reminds me of deceiving spirit in 1 Kings 22 that God authorized for the death of wicked King Ahab using 400 false prophets who believed they were hearing from God.

Yeah ... perhaps that is the one at work within you?

So you say that your three God-persons do not each have an individual personality, mind, will??

Three God-persons have individual personality (mind & will) while being One Spirit Three God-persons choose to truly Love each other always so One God is glorified

sounds really sweet ... "the three Gods (God-persons) love each other always" ... "individual personality while being One Spirit" ... makes for lovely movie

well, the three swimmers (or take any other illustration of a trio (how about musicians in a trio?) ,,, they also better be of only one mind and one purpose or else they would be divided and could not achieve much ...

Our human limitation is being in one place at one time while God's Spirit is unlimited.

What do you mean with "God's Spirit"? Is that the 3rd God-person Holy Spirit or some other Spirit? Does God have other parts aside from Spirit ?

Concur divided kingdom will be ruined: e.g. Matthew 12:22-28 while appreciating Jesus knowing thoughts of the Pharisees (which is something God does that humans cannot).

Humans certainly can ... WHEN God reveals it to them !! Or how do you think Peter knew what was in the heart of Ananias and Sapphira (cp Acts) ? Was Peter perhaps also God because he did know??

What words can be used to describe what you believe is impossible: Eternal God's Spirit ruling in heaven while also being in human flesh ? e.g. John 1:14

Why should I forsake the words of Scripture to which God enlightened me more than 4 decades ago in favor of fantasy interpretations without real scripture support which you suggest?

Your "God" as you try and describe is in effect THREE Gods ... no matter whether you deny that fact and claim you do not adhere to "tritheism". You know, when there are peas in a can or a glass, a label saying "beans" doesn't change what is in the container.

Appears your vocabulary has Trinity = Tritheism that agrees with physical experience (limitations) while not matching spiritual reality.

Well, my vocabulary is simply based on rules of language and how entities are describedd etc. When you have THREE individuals who are each GOD, then you have THREE GODS .... and you can scream your head off and jump straight up into the air or do flip flops and whatever else you please, nothing changes that simple straight forward language. You know, if you have THREE who are each Spirit, then those are THREE SPIRITS (and no physical limitations involved)

Concur correct label is needed. Physically cannot prove my daily spiritual experience (communion) in One God, which includes ReJoicing Always with Praise & Thanksgiving My words are inadequate for expressing magnitude of God's Love that includes His desire for an intense, intimate Love relationship with each individual God requires Faith (Forsaking All I Trust Him) to truly experience God's Love Hebrews 11:1

This has nothing to do with whether there is a TRINITY. God does NOT need to be a THREE GODS TRIO (Holy Trinity) in order for God to love, for God to do what He does. Your personal experience proves NOTHING in regards to Trinity or not Trinity.

A man can be Three in One: Father, Husband, and Son that is usually modalism as One man focuses on One mode at a time. Some humans talking to themselves have intriguing conversations between their personalities (or demonic possessors).

Hmn ... a Trinity proponent once again uses this analogy ... which according to someone else is really non-trinitarian.

One God has One Spirit interconnected in three personalities (mind & choice) loving each other

Sweet talk for movie ... could you actually define what you mean with those words such as "One Spirit" in the claim "One God has One Spirit" ? What does that mean? what does the word "spirit" mean and to what does it refer in this statement? What do you mean with "three personalities (mind & choice)" in this statement above? Is "personality" a person or a quality of a person? Does a person love or does personality love?

My spiritual worship is usually for All of One God while some times specifically Thank a person in One God: Abba, Yeshua, or Ruach HaKodesh

So there are persons IN One God ?? before it seemed to be more that your "three persons ARE One God (and not "are IN One God") ??

Now, instead of another emotional reply with many sweet words that are for the most part not really relevant to points you were asked, I would appreciate if you would reply with plain, straight forward relevant words answering the questions you were asked. See above last paragraphs of my reply to your statements with questions for clarification of what you actually meant.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
Curious if the one teaching you decades ago included insight into God's Love, Mercy, & Grace ?

??? ...

Contrasting teaching example is my past hearing a strange voice in my head urging me to commit suicide twice.

??? ...

Suspect spirit that taught you about "monotheism" was a deceiver since that spirit did not instruct about God's Love, Mercy, and Grace.

How do you know? Is it your speculation spirit that you listen to??

Thankful for God gently teaching my pastor and me about God's Love, Mercy, and Grace 1st John 2 includes testing for Truth (Love) as does 1st Thessalonians 5

Reminds me of deceiving spirit in 1 Kings 22 that God authorized for the death of wicked King Ahab using 400 false prophets who believed they were hearing from God.

Yeah ... perhaps that is the one at work within you?

Thankful for daily awareness of Holy Spirit (God) so many Bible verses are alive inside me: e.g. Isaiah 6:3, Revelation 4:8, Philippians 4:4-9, Ephesians 4-6, Galatians 5:13-26, Psalms 51 with many Psalms of Praise, plus Proverbs 15:1, Matthew 5-7, Job 38-42, .... (with my desire for more of God's Words to be living in me)
Thankful for Holy Spirit (God) that peaceably brings up specific memories from my past, which allows me to confess ("same speak") my sin for forgiveness and cleansing from unrighteousness 1 John 1:9 (some days have more memories cleansed than others)
FYI: Thankful for recent Kairos refresher inside prison that focused on forgiveness, which including loving myself as God Loves me Thankful for vision change to see every individual as someone God Loves (while not loving past sins)

So you say that your three God-persons do not each have an individual personality, mind, will??

Three God-persons have individual personality (mind & will) while being One Spirit Three God-persons choose to truly Love each other always so One God is glorified

sounds really sweet ... "the three Gods (God-persons) love each other always" ... "individual personality while being One Spirit" ... makes for lovely movie

??? written words lack inflection so not know how to interpret "lovely movie"
Couple movies worth watching are "Heaven is for Real" and "90 Minutes in Heaven". The movie "Fireproof" demonstrates Love Dare. For contrasting insight, recommend reading "23 Minutes in Hell" by Bill Wiese

well, the three swimmers (or take any other illustration of a trio (how about musicians in a trio?) ,,, they also better be of only one mind and one purpose or else they would be divided and could not achieve much ...

Our human limitation is being in one place at one time while God's Spirit is unlimited.

What do you mean with "God's Spirit"? Is that the 3rd God-person Holy Spirit or some other Spirit? Does God have other parts aside from Spirit ?

Three God-persona's (mind & will) share Unity of Image, Soul, & Spirit (essence, nature, ...) while choosing to Love each other always for God to be glorified
St Patrick used a three leaf shamrock plant to illustrate an aspect of the Trinity since one plant has one life essence flowing into three leaves (same substance in each leaf). Each leaf is distinct while being connected with the other two leaves. Caveat: leaves do not have minds so plant illustration is incomplete.

Concur divided kingdom will be ruined: e.g. Matthew 12:22-28 while appreciating Jesus knowing thoughts of the Pharisees (which is something God does that humans cannot).

Humans certainly can ... WHEN God reveals it to them !! Or how do you think Peter knew what was in the heart of Ananias and Sapphira (cp Acts) ? Was Peter perhaps also God because he did know??

Concur humans can know thought(s) that are revealed by God. Peter is a man who choose to hear Holy Spirit (God) and obey (Acts 5). All Three God-persons can search/know human hearts/thoughts.

What words can be used to describe what you believe is impossible: Eternal God's Spirit ruling in heaven while also being in human flesh ? e.g. John 1:14

Why should I forsake the words of Scripture to which God enlightened me more than 4 decades ago in favor of fantasy interpretations without real scripture support which you suggest?

Please elaborate on the beauty and wonder of God's Love "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." 1st Corinthians 13:4-7 (NIV 2011) includes Love is not self-seeking. Three God-persona's are not self-seeking while glorifying One God by truly Loving each other in One God
Personally praying for my words to be "truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15) using kind words (James 1:20). My past has lots of angry words that included misuse (abuse) of God's names. Cuss words provide One God insight (personally do not like hearing name of my God, friend, king, priest, savior, ... taken in vain).

Your "God" as you try and describe is in effect THREE Gods ... no matter whether you deny that fact and claim you do not adhere to "tritheism". You know, when there are peas in a can or a glass, a label saying "beans" doesn't change what is in the container.

Appears your vocabulary has Trinity = Tritheism that agrees with physical experience (limitations) while not matching spiritual reality.

Well, my vocabulary is simply based on rules of language and how entities are describedd etc. When you have THREE individuals who are each GOD, then you have THREE GODS .... and you can scream your head off and jump straight up into the air or do flip flops and whatever else you please, nothing changes that simple straight forward language. You know, if you have THREE who are each Spirit, then those are THREE SPIRITS (and no physical limitations involved)

Language rules include blocking out meaning(s) that are believed to be impossible. Hence One God having Three expressions of mind & will (person/persona/personality) becomes Three Gods (tritheism) from your perspective using 'One God = One Person' filter. Hence your John 1:14 illustration uses future family plan (instead of recognizing God's plan was accomplished). Genesis 3:15 and Isaiah 9:6 prophecies are future family plan examples. Another "impossible" scripture is "the mind of the Spirit" in Romans 8:27 about the Holy Spirit (God) since 'One God = One Person' filter does not allow Holy Spirit to be more than a power conduit. My filtering is a bit different: 'One God = Three Persons = One Lord Almighty = Unified Love'
FYI: translation of one language into another is the intersection of source & target word meaning(s) within belief filter(s).

Concur correct label is needed. Physically cannot prove my daily spiritual experience (communion) in One God, which includes ReJoicing Always with Praise & Thanksgiving My words are inadequate for expressing magnitude of God's Love that includes His desire for an intense, intimate Love relationship with each individual God requires Faith (Forsaking All I Trust Him) to truly experience God's Love Hebrews 11:1

This has nothing to do with whether there is a TRINITY. God does NOT need to be a THREE GODS TRIO (Holy Trinity) in order for God to love, for God to do what He does. Your personal experience proves NOTHING in regards to Trinity or not Trinity.

Perspective of 'One God = One Person' filtering denies Tritheism while being unable to understand/explain Trinity. My testimony about True Triune God makes no sense to you (seems illogical). Thankful for those who believe in Jesus as God & Man (John 3:16), who can say "Jesus is Lord" (1 Corinthians 12:3) for their lives being transformed in marvelous ways to imitate God (Ephesians 5:1-2). Thankful for Isaiah 9:6 prophecy: "a son is given ... Mighty God" that was written ~700 years prior to the birth of Jesus about The Son being human (born) and God (name reflects nature in Holy Human).

A man can be Three in One: Father, Husband, and Son that is usually modalism as One man focuses on One mode at a time. Some humans talking to themselves have intriguing conversations between their personalities (or demonic possessors).

Hmn ... a Trinity proponent once again uses this analogy ... which according to someone else is really non-trinitarian.

Triune God has Three Persons constantly in Godly Unity, which includes Loving each other that is different than human Three in One, which is usually non-trinitarian modalism (as humans focus on one mode at a time). Some humans can quickly switch between tasks: e.g. a drummer who is playing four rhythms using hands and feet.
Three in One command from God is: "Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength." Deuteronomy 6:5 that was quoted by Jesus in Mark 12:30 with addition to Love the LORD your God with all your mind. Essentially humans are to Love the LORD our God with everything we are (given to us by God).

One God has One Spirit interconnected in three personalities (mind & choice) loving each other

Sweet talk for movie ... could you actually define what you mean with those words such as "One Spirit" in the claim "One God has One Spirit" ? What does that mean? what does the word "spirit" mean and to what does it refer in this statement? What do you mean with "three personalities (mind & choice)" in this statement above? Is "personality" a person or a quality of a person? Does a person love or does personality love?

"One Spirit" is God's nature, essence, ...
The story of God's Love is the greatest romance ever known. Before creation, One God designed a way to be ruling in heaven while also being in a Holy man on earth so God's Spirit (Nature, Essence, ...) was in two places at the same time, which is something humans cannot do. My Biblical filtering is a bit different: 'One God = Three Persons/Personalities/Persona's = One Lord Almighty = Unified Love'

My spiritual worship is usually for All of One God while some times specifically Thank a person in One God: Abba, Yeshua, or Ruach HaKodesh

So there are persons IN One God ?? before it seemed to be more that your "three persons ARE One God (and not "are IN One God") ??

Jesus used ARE and IN:
John 10:30 I and the Father are one.
John 14:11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me

Now, instead of another emotional reply with many sweet words that are for the most part not really relevant to points you were asked, I would appreciate if you would reply with plain, straight forward relevant words answering the questions you were asked. See above last paragraphs of my reply to your statements with questions for clarification of what you actually meant.

Thankful for prayer followed by peaceably writing replies while humanly trying to use relevant words
Christian discourse should include Love in many dimensions (mind knowledge is one dimension) Deuteronomy 6:5 & Mark 12:30
My sweet words are written to express Love If words are stinging, please ask God why since Holy Spirit is loving you

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
Thankful for prayer followed by peaceably writing replies while humanly trying to use relevant words

I appreciate your reply and the attempts to answer questions more to the point of what was asked instead of just showering "sweet love words".

Christian discourse should include Love in many dimensions (mind knowledge is one dimension) Deuteronomy 6:5 & Mark 12:30

I would say that it actually does ... but then, spoken/written truth is not always the same as "sweet love words"

My sweet words are written to express Love If words are stinging, please ask God why since Holy Spirit is loving you

I have no doubts about God's love for me ... and your words are not stinging either, they actually are rather sweet and gentle and surely express your honest love for God and for His only begotten Son, the man Messiah Jesus.

I share the sentiments expressed by Jesus while he was beholding the crowds and seeing the many who were sincerely seeking to know God and believe in Him and His only begotten Son ... but who did not know what they should have known from Scripture regarding God and His Messiah, because they had been misled.

Unfortunately, for most of the last 2 millenniums, most of sincere Christian believers have been taught a successor to Babylonian ancient mystery religion by apostate so-called "Christian" churches etc., and the moment someone within such a "church" even dares to ask questions about that "Holy Trinity doctrinal pillar, that person is shunned and experiences persecution of various kinds ... No true love of God found in Trinitarian circles, churches, etc.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang said:

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus said:
My sweet words are written to express Love If words are stinging, please ask God why since Holy Spirit is loving you

I have no doubts about God's love for me ... and your words are not stinging either, they actually are rather sweet and gentle and surely express your honest love for God and for His only begotten Son, the man Messiah Jesus.

From my perspective, the Messiah Jesus is both "Son of God" (Man descended from King David 2 Samuel 7:5-16 prophecy also implies God from "your throne will be established forever") and "Son of Man" (God whose image was shown to Daniel 7:13-14 with allusion in Matthew 24:30-31)

I share the sentiments expressed by Jesus while he was beholding the crowds and seeing the many who were sincerely seeking to know God and believe in Him and His only begotten Son ... but who did not know what they should have known from Scripture regarding God and His Messiah, because they had been misled.

Please provide Scripture example(s) to show misleading teaching. Also Jesus used God's Name (I AM in Exodus 3:14 to the Israelites) as His own, which appears in the Gospel of John as Ἐγώ εἰμι (I AM)

Unfortunately, for most of the last 2 millenniums, most of sincere Christian believers have been taught a successor to Babylonian ancient mystery religion by apostate so-called "Christian" churches etc., and the moment someone within such a "church" even dares to ask questions about that "Holy Trinity doctrinal pillar, that person is shunned and experiences persecution of various kinds ... No true love of God found in Trinitarian circles, churches, etc.

Millennium teaching speculation ignores Jesus command in Matthew 28:19 "baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (has one Greek textual variant for the spelling of baptizing while all original Greek manuscripts agree on one name for: Father, Son, Holy Spirit).
Apologies for me being unable to find Babylonian ancient mystery speculation in the writings of Pliny & Eusebius. Used Logos Bible software to search 81 resources (Pliny,Eusebius) for (Babylon,Babylonian) WITHIN 11 WORDS (mystery,religion) found results in three resources. The earliest one was written in 418:

(3) Ninus ruled for fifty-two years. He was succeeded, as I have said, by his wife, Semiramis. When she, too, had ruled for forty-two years, in the middle of her reign, she founded Babylon as the capital of her kingdom. Thus Babylon, almost one thousand one hundred and sixty-four years after it had been founded, was despoiled of its wealth by the Medes and their king, Arbatus, moreover their prefect, and was deprived of the kingdom and king himself; yet the city itself remained unsubdued for sometime afterwards. Similarly, Rome also after the same number of years, that is, almost one thousand one hundred and sixty-four years, was invaded by the Goths and their king, Alaric, also their count, and was despoiled of her riches, not of her sovereignty. She still remains and rules unsubdued, although between both cities by hidden decrees (of God) the order of the whole parallelism was so preserved that in the one case its prefect, Arbatus, seized the power and in the other its prefect, Attalus, tried to rule; yet in Rome alone was the impious attempt frustrated with the aid of a Christian emperor.
And so I have believed that especially for this reason should these events be related, that by a partial disclosure of the ineffable judgments of God, those who especially grumble foolishly about Christian times may understand that the one God has so disposed the times in the beginning for the Babylonians and in the end for the Romans, and that it is due to His clemency that we live, but that it is due to our intemperance that we live wretchedly. Behold, the similar beginnings of Babylonia and Rome, the similar powers, the similar greatness, the similar times, the similar blessings, and the similar evils, yet not a similar decline or similar fall. For the one lost its power, the other retains it; the one was deprived of its king by murder, the other is secure with its emperor unharmed. And why is this? Because in the one case the turpitude of the passions was punished in the king; in the other the very serene tranquility of the Christian religion was preserved in the king; in Babylon, without reverence for religion, furious license satisfied thirst for pleasure; in Rome, there were Christians who showed mercy, and Christians to whom mercy was shown, and Christians because of whose memory and in whose memory mercy was shown. Therefore, let them cease to rail at religion and exasperate the patience of God so that this also they may possess unpunished, if at some time they may desist. Let them truly reflect upon the times of their ancestors, so disturbed by wars, accursed with crimes, horrible with dissensions, most constant in miseries, at whose existence they can properly shudder, and they necessarily should ask that they not return. Indeed, they should ask that God alone who, by His inscrutable justice, both permitted that they take place in the past, and, by His manifest mercy, is responsible that they not return. These matters will now be set forth by me more fully, unfolding my history orderly.

Orosius of Braga, The Seven Books of History against the Pagans, ed. Hermigild Dressler, trans. Roy J. Deferrari, vol. 50, The Fathers of the Church (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1964), 46–47.

Sadly history includes "Christian" atrocity examples: e.g. European crusaders killing Middle Eastern Christians because their worship of God was different. Persecution prophecies in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 have been fulfilled many times. In the past decade or two have noticed number and intensity of earthquakes, volcanoes, and weather events increasing plus wars between nations.

Wikipedia article => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Babylons includes Babylonian ancient mystery religion speculation.

Keep Smiling