Can One Be Christian and Not Believe In The Trinity?
- Thread starter GodsGrace
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
1 Corinthians 15:27 "For ‘God has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘all things are put in subjection,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Jesus is below / subject to God:
1 Corinthians 11:3 – “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”
Acts 2:22 – “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—”
John 5:19 – “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.”
John 5:30 – “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.”
John 14:28 – “You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”
Mark 10:18 – “And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’”
If @Grailhunter were correct, the Apostles, and even Christ himself would have clearly defined it. Instead, we are taught the opposite
1 Corinthians 11:3 – “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”
Acts 2:22 – “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—”
John 5:19 – “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.”
John 5:30 – “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.”
John 14:28 – “You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”
Mark 10:18 – “And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’”
If @Grailhunter were correct, the Apostles, and even Christ himself would have clearly defined it. Instead, we are taught the opposite
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Ok I see a lot of words in the OT. You can throw a dart wearing a blindfold and hit the target sometimes.
But the bottom line the Jews were not looking for the Messiah to be a God.
Are you Jehovah's Witness?
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him.
When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. 1st Corinthians 15:27-28
How true
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
If “no one has ever seen God”...how many people saw Jesus? If Jesus is God, then thousands saw God. It doesn’t say “no one has ever seen the Father”....so is this a contradiction?
Who is the “only begotten god” (monogenes theos) ? Can God be “begotten”?
Someone who is “begotten” needs a ‘begetter’ who existed before them, and who caused their existence. Jesus is called “the firstborn of ALL creation” (Col 1:15) which makes him the first creation to ever exist....and in fact the first and only direct creation of his God and Father...making him a unique “Son of God”.
Rev 3:14 says...
“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's creation.” (ESV)
Jesus is “the Amen” and “the faithful and true witness”....a witness for his Father, not himself. He did not teach a single thing that originated from himself.
John 7:14-16 ESV.....
“About the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and began teaching. The Jews therefore marveled, saying, “How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?” So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.”
All very clear, unambiguous statements.
“Monogenes” means an “only child”...an expression used elsewhere in the Bible to describe the “only child” of their parents.
Can an only child have siblings? Yes, by adoption....the one who was created by them is still an only “begotten” child.
Jesus is said to have siblings, who were the children of Joesph and Mary after Jesus was born. But Jesus said he had “brothers” (spiritual) which the Bible says is by adoption.
If only the Father is said to have “sons”, who then are Jesus’ brothers?
Again, is that a contradiction?
If Jesus was not 100% human, he could not have become the “last Adam”, since Jesus’ life was given in exchange for the life that Adam’s sin took away from all his children. That is what redemption is....the payment of a set price to redeem something that was forfeited.
Jesus was not a human when he took part in creation. He was the Son of God right from his creation. All things came into existence “through” the Son...but from the Father. This is agency...something ignored by trinitarians.
Once you realise that John 1:1 doesn’t say in Greek what is translated into English, the following 2 verses back up what Paul wrote in Col 1:15-17.
John 1:1-3...
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, (ho theos) and the Word was God (theos).
A distinction is made between the two “gods” mentioned there. Only one is “ho theos” (Yahweh/Jehovah) the other can mean any “divine” personage, which Jesus obviously was.
It goes on to say...
“He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.”
We have to ask what “beginning” this refers to, because an eternal God had no beginning, nor can an immortal God die. If Christ did not die the exact same death as Adam, the ransom was not paid and we are not redeemed.....we remain unforgiven.
God is never said to be 100% God and 100% human.....and he’d have another 100% as God the Holy Spirit......that’s 300%! The most illogical doctrine in existence but not based on Scripture.....it was not introduced as official “church” doctrine until the 4th century under the authority of a pagan Roman Emperor who mandated Roman Catholicism as the state religion.....that was not Christianity...not even close to the teachings of Jesus Christ....which is why Jesus will say to the many who are travelling the wrong road....”I never knew you”.....(Matt 7:21-23) ”NEVER” means, “not ever”.
Deut 6:4 states....ESV...
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.”
In Hebrew, the Tetragrammaton is clearly in the text. “The Lord” should read as “Yahweh”....he is the “one God” of the Jews, and the one Jesus came to teach them about.
The apostles knew who was their God unequivocally....
1 Cor 8:5-6...ESV...
“For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.”
Any ambiguity there? I don’t see any as the agency of the son is clearly presented.
Who was their “one God”? They identified “the Father”...and Jesus as their “Lord”...a title that is not a substitute for “God”, but a title of respect, frequently used in Bible times.
There is way more clear, unambiguous Scripture that upholds the fact that Jesus is what he said he was....”the Son of God”. (John 10:31-36) Read that in Greek and see the use of the definite article.....never used when speaking of the son, but only the Father.
mailmandan
Well-Known Member
Jesus' point in quoting Psalm 82:6 is that if human judges can be called gods, then this designation is even more appropriate for Jesus who truly is the Son of God. Jesus is the Son of God because of the incarnation. John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
The word that’s translated “only begotten” is the Greek word “monotones."
3439 monogenḗs (from 3411 /misthōtós, “one-and-only” and 1085 /génos, “offspring, stock”) – properly, one-and-only; “one of a kind” – literally, “one (monos) of a class, genos” (the only of its kind).
The Word was with God and the Word was God (vs. 1) and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (vs. 14) is a crystal clear reference to Jesus. Verses 2-3 also confirm His Deity.
Other passages of Scripture where Jesus is unquestionably called God
Isaiah 7:14 - A Child Will Be Born And His Name Is Called": "Emanuel: God with us"
Isaiah 9:6 - A Child Will Be Born And His Name Is Called: "Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace
John 20:28 - Thomas said to Jesus, 'My Lord and My God'
Hebrews 1:8 - Father addresses the Son as God
And what was Jesus before He became one of us ?
1. co Creator with the Father, Jesus already existed before the foundation of the world, before A&E were created (Col 1)
2. Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
3. Joh 3:13 Jesus voluntarily left His glorious place with the Father and descended from heaven to be born here (John 3:13)
4. To be born as the Lamb slain as that was decided before the foundation of the world, before A&E were created (Rev 13:8, 1 Peter 1:20)
5. Why point 4? Because God and Jesus foreknew that A&E would fall and God the Father and God the Son agreed that God the Son would be the Lamb slain, who would pay the price for sin and reconciliation.
I am pretty sure you must realize no sinful man could ever pay the price for sin, only God Himself in the human flesh could do that, Someone without sin, as the Lamb slain.
Jesus was the greatest human ever born, but he was made a little lower than the angels Psalm 8:4-6.
True, and also true is : Filipp 2:5-8
Filipp 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Filipp 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Filipp 2:7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Filipp 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
equality with God, equality with God, equality with God.
Praise the Father for his mercy, praise Jesus for willing to pay the price.
TrevorHL
Active Member
- Jul 17, 2024
- 617
- 174
- 43
- 82
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
Greetings again GodsGrace, Grailhunter and mailmandan,
Kind regards
Trevor
I believe that Jesus came into existence by means of his conception and birth Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35.
I disagree with your assessment and perspective. It misses the target as to the teaching and purpose of the OT.
No. They believe that Jesus was Michael the Archangel before and after his ministry. I believe Jesus was and is a human.
This is one aspect. Yes, he is the Son of God, not God the Son.
Kind regards
Trevor
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
What was needed was as the Apostle understood him to be.
Human in every respect. Hebrews 2
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Yes, “unique” is a good way to describe this “son of God” because God has many “sons” according to the Bible. So what is unique about his “firstborn”? He is the first and only direct creation of his God and Father. All things were created “through” this Son, but not by him. God’s spirit was operating through the son as it says in Genesis 1:2. Yahweh and his son are the ones mentioned in Gen 1:26...a team working together on the gift that God was going to give his precious son. Creation was not just brought into existence “through” him, but also “for hm”. ( Col 1:15-17)
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Genesis 1:2 “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.”
Where does it say God was working through His Son here?
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Gen 1:26...the “us” and “our” described there...unless you think God was talking to himself?
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
The plural noun Elohim is sometimes paired with a singular verb and at other times with a plural verb. This variation is significant. It shows that although the Elohim are many and united as one, they can also act and decide independently. Yet the power they exercise and the glory they reveal all originate from the One, Yahweh.
In Genesis 1:26 the verb is plural, indicating more than one agent. Trinitarians (and those who believe in a pre-existene Son) misunderstand the plural pronoun “us” as proof of a Trinity, but the text does not imply a triune deity, merely a plurality. Job 38:7 suggests that the “us” refers to the “morning stars” and the “sons of God,” the angels who rejoiced at Creation. Similar language is used with reference to the Elohim in Genesis 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, and other passages.
In Genesis 3:22 God says, “Behold, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil.” Obviously, man did not become like a member of a Trinity; rather, he became like one of the angels, beings who attained their exalted status through probation. Christ likewise promised that the faithful will become “equal unto the angels” in the age to come (Luke 20:36).
In Psalm 8:5 the same word Elohim is translated angels. And comparing Numbers 12:8 with Acts 7:38, or Genesis 32:30 with Hosea 12:3–4, shows that Elohim, often translated “God” can refer to the angels, the representatives of the eternal Creator.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
I believe that you have the timing a little off here....When it says “before the foundation of the world”, it’s not talking about the planet but the “kosmos” the world of humankind. He was referring to the children of Adam and Eve. Jesus did exist before all creation but “the founding of the world” is not the earth. His service as the redeemer was not needed until sin came into the world....which was through Adam. (Rom 5:12)
Yes, as the “firstborn of all creation” (Col 1:15) the son of God was a glorious spirit being enjoying his life with his God and Father long before any other creation was brought into being.
Yes, it was a huge sacrifice on his part to have himself reduced to a being “lower that the angels”...whom he had personally brought into existence. All creation came “through the son” by means of God’s spirit, just as Christ and his disciples did when God’s holy spirit became operative on them, empowering them to perform miracles.
There is no mention of Jesus being able to perform miracles until he was baptised, and received the Holy Spirit. It was one of the reasons why his siblings did not put faith in him...he was just their older brother.....they had grown up with him, but not until after his resurrection did they put faith in him.
He was not “slain” in any way before Adam sinned....it was through sin that death came to the human race....so if Adam had chosen not to accept his wife’s offer, God would have dealt with the situation differently.
In Genesis, God acted only once in creation itself.....after the creation of man, and with the gift of free will, they would then decide by their choices how God would respond to their actions. All he did from that time onward was respond to the choices that the humans and the rebel angels made.
That is not stated anywhere in the Bible....God being all knowing, would have had contingencies for any and all choices made in the garden. He allowed the humans to exercise their free will and acted accordingly.
There were several other scenarios that could have eventuated.....say for example, the devil had second thoughts about his intentions and changed his mind. He was a free willed being as well.
Or Eve in consulting her husband about the devil’s offer, may have advised her not to take the fruit when God had forbidden it.
Or Adam could have refused his wife’s offer and changed the course of human history.
God did not decide in advance, but allowed his children to make their own choices. The death penalty should have driven home how serious it was to take what God had claimed was his own property.
That is true, but did you miss the point of Jesus being brought into the world without sin? Only a sinless man could offer to God the only thing that would balance the scales of his perfect justice.
A life was to be given for a life under God’s law.....but since there was no one perfect or sinless, Jesus volunteered to be that sinless life, offered to save the whole human race...if they would just obey him.
You are not really reading what it says...
How was Jesus existing in God’s “form”? What “form” does God have? To be absolutely truthful, God has no form at all , because he is invisible. “God is a spirit” according to John, and consequently, so was Jesus before his human birth. Spirits exist in a realm that does not include the material surroundings that we experience.
So to exercise our intelligence here for a moment, we can only imagine how spirits interpret their own surroundings and their own definition of glory. I don’t think we possess any way to understand that, as the prophets who were given revelations into that realm, had difficulty putting into words what they were seeing.
Then it says the opposite to how you interpret it....Jesus ”did NOT count equality with God a thing to be grasped.”
IOW he had NO desire to be equal to his God and Father.
“Taking the form of a servant”......don’t we have to ask whose servant he was?
Acts 4:27, 30 tell us that Jesus was “God’s holy servant”....so how does God become his own servant?
And “being in the likeness of men”...in what way was Jesus like any man existing since Adam was created? He looked like any other human but he was without the stain of sin.....he was Adam’s exact equivalent, offering his sinless life to redeem us, and give us back what Adam lost for us.
“Becoming obedient as far as death”...again to whom was Jesus obedient? He was obedient to his God and Father. A God he served even in heaven. (Rev 3:12) By calling the Father “my God” when he was back in heaven, he showed his ongoing subservience to his Father.
It goes on to say that in Jesus’ name every knee should bow....but to whose glory?
“To the glory of God the Father”.
So....”equality with God, equality with God, equality with God.”.....
Nowhere is that even hinted.
Last edited:
Lambano
Well-Known Member
- Jul 13, 2021
- 10,000
- 12,771
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
And those who follow Jesus, trust Jesus to save them, love Jesus, and obey Jesus's teachings, but cannot accept the dogma of the Trinity for whatever reasons - Do you believe them to be lost?
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
This is a great question, one I’ve been asked many times within my own community. Over the years, I’ve gone back and forth on it. Personally, I see the Trinity as a form of idolatry: a man-made doctrine that fashions a god according to human ideas rather than the revelation of Scripture. While I warn of its dangers, I prefer God to be the judge of us all!
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Please note that I said it would make them less of a good Christian "steward." In other words, they will be passing their confusion on to others. Indeed, anybody in virtually any religion can be a "good person." What religion they were raised up in or converted to is not always something they can control or correct without help. They may in their heart of hearts be "good people."
Of course, Christianity saves people not just because they are "good," but more, because they embrace Christ, who is the ultimate Good. Salvation is a matter of choosing one who mitigates our sins, and does not simply over look them.
To mitigate sin we must embrace one who endows us with his goodness as well as deals with our sins. And when we accept Christ we accept his means of disposing of our sins, along with their guilt.
I'm happy whenever I see good people. I'm happier when they accept Christ because not only will it make them better, but it will also cause them to repent of the wrongs they do.
There are Christians who reject the Trinity. And they may simply have been propagandized, and defend the only thing they've been taught to believe in.
When they pass on something less helpful to others it doesn't mean they're not good. It just means they won't be as good a steward as they would be if they present the truth without confusion.
It helps people better when they are brought to a truth that makes sense, giving them security in their faith. And when their faith is more secure they become more associated with the goodness of Christ and become more determined to repent when they sin.
- Status
Similar threads
