Can One Be Christian and Not Believe In The Trinity?

[JLB]

The problem is that you believe things are there that are not there.
You are loyal to doctrine and not scriptures. And you think they say things that they do not.
It was not hard to come up with over hundred scriptures.....and a Father says He is pleased with HIs Son....
that it 2 people my gosh!!! Just common sense. The Father loves the Son....He does not love Himself.....that is clear.....Love cannot exist with 1 person. What you believe is not. Yahweh begot a Son.....He did not beget Himself.....clear and truth but it is hard for you to understand and accept. Because your mind is all mucked up with teaching of doctrine.....

View attachment 78875

Jesus Christ is YHWH.


But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:8-10


The Son is called God.

The Son is called LORD; YHWH

 

[Wrangler]

the doctrine of the Trinity fully affirms monotheism

Except for the 3 part.

 

[Hiddenthings]

And what greater example of humility can even be conceived than the perfectly holy, righteous creator becoming one of his creators in order to redeem them from their own sin?

Thank you for engaging with the truth.

If this passage is read with an open heart and an honest mind, it becomes clear that it is not speaking of God becoming a servant, but of a Son becoming a servant.

Yahweh formed His Son into a Servant for the learning of obedience and for the suffering of death, as a propitiation for sin.

You should study this more, because this is not correct. The specific word used for form, morphe, is use only three times in the NT--in Phil. 2:6 and 7, and in Mark 16:12.

Mar 16:12 After these things he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country.

Here is the basis of Paul's exhortation which you need to unlock its truth.

Isaiah 49:5 And now says the LORD, who formed me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring Jacob back to Him…

Yahweh is the former - the divine craftsman who shaped Christ's Character to be like His Own.

Others have also been formed from the Womb like Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5)

Again, once you understand Who is forming and why they are being formed you will leave you Trinitarian formula behind.

Based on a legitimate meaning of harpagmos, "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped," can be understood as holding fast onto something he already had. And that is the only understanding that fits the context.

You will recall this in John

For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:18)

He never called himself God, rather, he perfectly revealed God’s character through obedient Sonship.

Have you considered what privileges he laid aside to become the Son of Man? It seems you haven’t, because dogma still has a grip on your thinking.

The NIV gives a great understanding of what Paul is actually saying:

Php 2:6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

And for this, among many other reasons I don’t use that version, it carries a strong Trinitarian bias. Jesus was not born of a woman to partake in divine nature; you know that. The apostles consistently speak of him as being like us in every respect.


Yet you would set that aside to introduce a second nature?


I find it strange how quickly you’re willing to alter the meaning and intent of Paul’s teaching, treating it as though he were describing your incarnation, when you know what he is actually saying.

Who did the emptying? Of what was he emptied of? How did that emptying occur? Could he have emptied himself if he did not already exist?

Good questions!


I asked you earlier: what privileges did Christ relinquish to become the Son of Man and die as such?


If you cannot answer that, you will never truly understand what He emptied himself of, and why.

Yes, that is true. I recommend that you do more study, serious study, then reconsider your post.

I understand the truth because I followed Paul's reasonings and understood how the OT & NT agree.

Here is some homework for you to consider:

Compare these passages to Isaiah’s Servant prophecies:

• Isaiah 45:21–25 → Philippians 2:9–11
• Isaiah 50:5 → Philippians 2:8
• Isaiah 52:13 → Philippians 2:9
• Isaiah 53:10; 60:21; 61:3 → Philippians 2:11
• Isaiah 42:6; 49:6 → Philippians 2:15
• Isaiah 49:4 → Philippians 2:16

Paul encourages you to return to Isaiah, to meditate on the suffering Servant and understand his example.

You won't find credal language there - you know that - but what you will find is something incredibly moving and life changing.

God bless your reading.

 

[Justified]

I see so you believe 1 John 5:7 is a lie and all the scriptures about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are lies too?

Wow. No. I said that I don't believe 1 John 5:7 is as stated in the KJV because that is far too developed doctrine of the Trinity to be original. I believe the ESV and others have it correct:

1Jn 5:7 For there are three that testify:

And it absolutely does not follow that therefore I believe "all the scriptures about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are lies too." The NT repeatedly upholds that idea; the KJV of 1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else.

And it's moot point to say "take one away and he ceases to be God" since that is not possible.

No, the language we use actually matters. The Father is not a "part of God;" the Son is not a "part of God;" the Holy Spirit is not a "part of God." They are each fully and equally God, not parts of a whole.

There are in fact three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are One.

Those saying otherwise are claiming God's Word contains lies and thus are calling God a liar whether they realize it or nor.

This is the false claim the devil has deceived many into believing that Jesus FAILED to control what went in to His Canon and is claiming some things in God's Word are lies.

This is circular reasoning, which is very common among the KJV only crowd. It's about manuscript evidence, nothing more.

This is the false claim the devil has deceived many into believing that Jesus FAILED to control what went in to His Canon and is claiming some things in God's Word are lies.

And so the deceived apparently will continue being deceived and will continue deceiving others.

They are the blind leading the blind and they all in the ditch.

Again, this is circular reasoning, which is very common among the KJV only crowd. It's about manuscript evidence, nothing more.

 

[Wrangler]

I addressed one, you mocked it. Why should I give you even more of my energy?

No, you didn’t address one that I mocked; you ignored the specifics to just re-iterate a general conclusion.

 

[Justified]

Except for the 3 part.

Showing once again you don't know what the doctrine of the Trinity states and that you don't understand the category error you are making. Your straw man arguments are very tiresome.

 

[Wrangler]

What do you even want addressed in this?

Discuss each point as it applies to the pros and cons of each argument, silly.

 

[Wrangler]

Showing once again you don't know what the doctrine of the Trinity states and that you don't understand the category error you are making.

You keep saying this but do not show how it is true. So, I will peat what I said. You are the one making the category error.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Wrangler, to reinforce my earlier points about the sincerity of our Christian friends here, and whether they can engage the OT text to understand Paul’s teaching...I listed the references in my previous post as an aid. So far, no one has acknowledged the truth of Paul’s reasoning drawn from Isaiah.

Not one comment!

It’s more a test than anything, showing how resistant many Christians are to being led into the Word and away from credal dogma. Their minds are clouded, and they lack the skills to dig into Paul’s arguments to see what lies at their foundation. Instead, they adopt the philosophies of men, twist the meanings of words, and impose notions that were never intended to justify their beliefs. It is a form of disobedience: they cannot be guided by the Word of God.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Justified

Verse 8 “fashioned as a man”: Greek “in condition as a man” (en homoiōmati anthrōpōn)

“Humbled himself” an extraordinary example for us!

Why did Jesus need to humble himself?

Consider related Scriptures: Matthew 18:4; 23:12; Luke 3:5; 14:11; 18:14; James 4:10; 1 Peter 5:6.

Obedient unto death:

Jesus endured trials patiently and without resistance, even praying for forgiveness for his persecutors (Luke 23:34). He is our model for enduring suffering (Hebrews 12:3–4; Mark 8:34–35).

He fully submitted to God’s will, even to death (Matthew 26:39), learning obedience through his experiences (Hebrews 5:7–9). Through his suffering, he cultivated a personal relationship with his brothers and sisters, remaining intimately connected to those he came to save.

Even his death on the cross represents the final act of obedience in a life of perfect submission (Romans 5:19; Philippians 2:8). He empathizes with all he was raised up to save, including those persecuted for their faith. No one can claim that he doesn’t understand their struggles (Hebrews 2:14–15).

Appreciating his life should inspire both emotional and motivational response in us (Galatians 2:20).

The entire life of Christ exemplifies an obedient Son, not a condescending God.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Justified

If you have any integrity, you will recognize that Paul’s intent was not to depict God lowering Himself in His essence, but rather to show a God who formed and exalted His own Son for the purpose of crucifying the flesh and removing the power of sin and death in the world.

This truth carries certain unthinkable realities for everyone in this forum, yet these remain realities that are still to be fully realized at his coming.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

I believe "all the scriptures about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are lies too." The NT repeatedly upholds that idea; the KJV of 1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else.

The confusion you are under is not coming from the Lord Jesus

They are each fully and equally God, not parts of a whole.

They cannot be separated because they are in fact ONE

Man is created in God's image so the spirit, the soul, and the body cannot be separated and are one.

Except for those that claim they have 3 different persons living inside of them, the off their meds chaps.

This is circular reasoning, which is very common among the KJV only crowd. It's about manuscript evidence, nothing more.

It's actually the confusion you are under that is causing you to spin round and round.

When you said "1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else" you are acknowledging that you believe the content of 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct since the whole of scripture verifies that 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct.

Showing once again you don't know what the doctrine of the Trinity states and that you don't understand the category error you are making. Your straw man arguments are very tiresome.

When you said "1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else" you are acknowledging that you believe the content of 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct since the whole of scripture verifies that 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct.

Your polyester man arguments are quite comical and entertaining

 

[Justified]

If this passage is read with an open heart and an honest mind, it becomes clear that it is not speaking of God becoming a servant, but of a Son becoming a servant.

This is circular reasoning, on two counts. First, you're presuming that those who agree with you are the ones who "read with an open heart and honest mind." But you may not be, so be careful in making that claim against those who disagree with you.

Second, you're presuming that the Son isn't God, yet that is what the passage states.

Yahweh formed His Son into a Servant for the learning of obedience and for the suffering of death, as a propitiation for sin.

Where is that stated in Phil. 2:6-8?

Here is the basis of Paul's exhortation which you need to unlock its truth.

Isaiah 49:5 And now says the LORD, who formed me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring Jacob back to Him…

Yahweh is the former - the divine craftsman who shaped Christ's Character to be like His Own.

Others have also been formed from the Womb like Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5)

Again, once you under Who is forming and why they are being formed you will leave you Trinitarian formula behind.

What does any of that have to do with Phil. 2:6-8?

Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
...
Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Heb 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”
Heb 1:10 And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
Heb 1:11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment,
Heb 1:12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.”

The Father says "of the Son . . . You Lord, laid the foundations of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end."

But when we look at where that came from:

Psa 102:1 A Prayer of one afflicted, when he is faint and pours out his complaint before the LORD. Hear my prayer, O LORD; let my cry come to you!
...
Psa 102:24 “O my God,” I say, “take me not away in the midst of my days— you whose years endure throughout all generations!”
Psa 102:25 Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.
Psa 102:26 They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,
Psa 102:27 but you are the same, and your years have no end.

The writer of Hebrews clearly has the Father applying a passage about Yahweh to the Son. There is only one way to understand that--the Son is also Yahweh, according to the Father.

You will recall this in John

For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:18)

He never called himself God, rather, he perfectly revealed God’s character through obedient Sonship.

You're missing the obvious with John 5:18, even though you bolded it--by Jesus referring to himself as the Son of God, that is, by "calling God his own Father," he was "making himself equal with God." For that reason the Jews tried to kill him.

It happened again in John 10:33-36. And then in John 8:58, the Jews wanted to stone him for claiming to have absolute existence, which is an attribute of God alone. He absolutely was calling himself God.

Have you considered what privileges he laid aside to become the Son of Man? It seems you haven’t, because dogma still has a grip on your thinking.

What was he prior to becoming the Son of Man?

And for this, among many other reasons I don’t use that version, it carries a strong Trinitarian bias. Jesus was not born of a woman to partake in divine nature; you know that. The apostles consistently speak of him as being like us in every respect.


Yet you would set that aside to introduce a second nature?


I find it strange how quickly you’re willing to alter the meaning and intent of Paul’s teaching, treating it as though he were describing your incarnation, when you know what he is actually saying.

Again, you're missing the forest for the trees. The NIV simply makes more clear what is actually being said in the Greek. It essentially states nothing different from the other translations, properly understood.

Of course Jesus was like us--truly and fully human. So, no, I am setting aside nothing. The issue is that John 1:1, 14 and Phil. 2:6-8 show that God, the Son, became human. But, God cannot cease to be God. Therefore, he must necessarily have been both truly God and truly man. Paul most definitely is describing the incarnation.

Good questions!


I asked you earlier: what privileges did Christ relinquish to become the Son of Man and die as such?


If you cannot answer that, you will never truly understand what He emptied himself of, and why.

You're making certain assumptions that I cannot know, so I cannot answer. What does "Son of man" mean? Who was he prior to becoming the Son of Man?

I understand the truth because I followed Paul's reasonings and understood how the OT & NT agree.

Except you haven't, as I have pointed out.

Here is some homework for you to consider:

Compare these passages to Isaiah’s Servant prophecies:

• Isaiah 45:21–25 → Philippians 2:9–11
• Isaiah 50:5 → Philippians 2:8
• Isaiah 52:13 → Philippians 2:9
• Isaiah 53:10; 60:21; 61:3 → Philippians 2:11
• Isaiah 42:6; 49:6 → Philippians 2:15
• Isaiah 49:4 → Philippians 2:16

Paul encourages you to return to Isaiah, to meditate on the suffering Servant and understand his example.

Not necessary. Stick with the immediate context of Phil. 2:6-8 before branching out, and that includes, as I pointed out, a necessary understanding of some important Greek words. It will never do to just go proof-text all over the place and think you have supported your view when you haven't even dealt with the actual text of the passage in question.

Besides, there is an abundance of other context throughout the NT that you're not taking into account.

 

[Justified]

@Justified

If you have any integrity, you will recognize that Paul’s intent was not to depict God lowering Himself in His essence, but rather to show a God who formed and exalted His own Son for the purpose of crucifying the flesh and removing the power of sin and death in the world.

"If you have any integrity"--comments like this are unnecessary, unhelpful, and ultimately, prideful.

Paul's intent absolutely was to show that the Son, who was also God in nature, took on human flesh to redeem creation. Again, there is no conceivable greater example of humility than that.

This truth carries certain unthinkable realities for everyone in this forum, yet these remain realities that are still to be fully realized at his coming.

It's a half-truth.

 

[Justified]

@Justified

Verse 8 “fashioned as a man”: Greek “in condition as a man” (en homoiōmati anthrōpōn)

“Humbled himself” an extraordinary example for us!

Why did Jesus need to humble himself?

Consider related Scriptures: Matthew 18:4; 23:12; Luke 3:5; 14:11; 18:14; James 4:10; 1 Peter 5:6.

Obedient unto death:

Jesus endured trials patiently and without resistance, even praying for forgiveness for his persecutors (Luke 23:34). He is our model for enduring suffering (Hebrews 12:3–4; Mark 8:34–35).

He fully submitted to God’s will, even to death (Matthew 26:39), learning obedience through his experiences (Hebrews 5:7–9). Through his suffering, he cultivated a personal relationship with his brothers and sisters, remaining intimately connected to those he came to save.

Even his death on the cross represents the final act of obedience in a life of perfect submission (Romans 5:19; Philippians 2:8). He empathizes with all he was raised up to save, including those persecuted for their faith. No one can claim that he doesn’t understand their struggles (Hebrews 2:14–15).

Appreciating his life should inspire both emotional and motivational response in us (Galatians 2:20).

The entire life of Christ exemplifies an obedient Son, not a condescending God.

It's a shame that you have lessened his example of humility in Phil. 2:5-8.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Not necessary.

Leave it with you.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

What does "Son of man" mean?

Perhaps you should take some time off to learn what God's Word teaches so you'll know who "Son of man" is.

 

[Hiddenthings]

For those who desire to know Paul's reasoning upon Isaiah's Servant Songs here are the connections:

Isaiah	Philippians 2	Connection
Isaiah 45:21–25	Philippians 2:9–11	God exalts the Servant; every knee shall bow; glory given.
Isaiah 50:5	Philippians 2:8	Servant’s obedience and submission; “learned obedience through suffering.”
Isaiah 52:13	Philippians 2:9	Exaltation after suffering; lifted up by God then raised and "granted life"
Isaiah 53:10; 60:21; 61:3	Philippians 2:11	Suffering for atonement; ultimate recognition and glorification.
Isaiah 42:6; 49:6	Philippians 2:15	Servant as light to the nations; shining example; pure, blameless life.
Isaiah 49:4	Philippians 2:16	Servant perseveres in mission despite challenges; holding fast to the Word of life.

Nowhere in this foundational text is the idea that God emptied Himself of his nature or essence. What is taught is how He formed the character of a Son to die as the Son of Man and be raised and exalted as the Son of God with power. This power, or divine nature was given to him by God, his Father and Creator when he was raised from the dead.

 

[Justified]

The confusion you are under is not coming from the Lord Jesus

I'm not confused.

They cannot be separated because they are in fact ONE

Of course they can't be separated, but you said they were parts, and they are not.

Man is created in God's image so the spirit, the soul, and the body cannot be separated and are one.

Except that according to Jesus that is not true:

Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

If the body can be killed and not the soul, then they can be separated.

It's actually the confusion you are under that is causing you to spin round and round.

No, I'm not confused or spinning.

When you said "1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else" you are acknowledging that you believe the content of 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct since the whole of scripture verifies that 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct.




When you said "1 John 5:7 isn't needed, as it's just a sum of everything else" you are acknowledging that you believe the content of 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct since the whole of scripture verifies that 1 John 5:7 is in fact true and correct.

Your polyester man arguments are quite comical and entertaining

Of course the contents of 1 John 5:7 in the KJV are true, but they're very likely not in the autograph. Nothing "polyester" about that.

 

[Grailhunter]

And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16


Who was manifested in the flesh, the Father or the Son?

Find the scripture where the word manifested appears.