Falling Short

October 23, 2007

Tim says:

“Scripture clearly teaches progressive knowledge starting in the OT, becoming fuller in the NT (as such as Christ proved by his earthly teachings) concerning the things of God, not limited to the doctrine of the Trinity.”

Since the Trinity is a doctrine of man and not anywhere in the Bible, then we can clearly make an argument against it without even resorting to the Bible. It is a doctrine based on philosophy, not scripture.

However, the Trinity implies that God has given us full knowledge of Himself (since God can be no more and no fewer than 3 persons), but you also disagree with Trinity when you wrote “becoming fuller in the NT”. If it is “becoming fuller”, then it is incomplete. Therefore, we cannot claim to know whether God has revealed himself totally to us. Because, as you clearly admit, He has not.

The Trinity claims certainty where none exists. Just like evolution…

6 Responses to “Falling Short”

  1. Tim Says:

    This is incorrect, for the Trinity is clearly presented and establish within the Word of God. It is Oneness which chooses to deny the further revelation of God by His Spirit through the writings of His chosen persons into what we have today as the Scriptures.

    Even the theology of the Trinity does not in and of itself make the assumption that the Trinity is all there is to know of God. Interestingly in Genesis 1 in creation, God says let “us” make man in “our” image and “our” likeness, whereby we see comparison easily seen as Father-soul, Christ-body, and Spirit-spirit. A triune God and a triune man — yet one God and one man.

    To deny Scripture teaches the Trinity is to deny Scripture.

  2. retroc Says:

    You should know better than to take up Genesis 1 as an argument. That it supports the Trinity is a stretch and unacceptable.

  3. retroc Says:

    As I’ve pointed out, the Trinity is not established within the Word, but placed upon it like a cookie-cutter.

    What you fail to see is that the Trinity is simply an explanation and not a doctrine. It is a tool, nothing more – in that it attempts to explain something.

  4. Tim Says:

    Ah, but the Oneness tries to assume Christ speaks merely to himself his entire ministry, or either it is God talking to himself though he be in heaven and on earth at the same moment.

    Even at the mention of the Trinity seen at the baptism of Christ, Oneness fall well short of any intelligent answer concerning why three persons if God is not such within one Godhead.

    And when Scripture says the Father sends Christ, or the Father and/or Christ sends the Spirit, Oneness assumes God is but sending himself and not really another.

    The questions are:

    Is the Father, God?
    Is Christ, God?
    Is the Holy Spirit, God?

    Or, are they all simply manifestations of a God, which you assume we know nothing of?

    For Scripture tells us that “It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.” [Romans 8:34]

    Whereby is this intercession necessary, and who then stands by whom, if Christ is merely a manifestation of God, and not the second person of the Trinity?

  5. retroc Says:

    And people say you guys worship more than one god! Where do they get such an idea?

    “…either it is God talking to himself though he be in heaven and on earth at the same moment.”

    You are totally incorrect in claiming that the Trinity explains this, when it does no such thing. You cannot explain how God exists as three because it would be beyond our current understanding.

    Oneness doesn’t attempt to do explain it. God did what he always does: the impossible. It is Man’s arrogance, such as what you showing, that attempts to understand it. That is the nature of philosophy and that is the trap into which you have fallen.

    “Oneness fall well short of any intelligent answer…”

    If you fail to understand the explanations that have been given it doesn’t mean that the explanation is flawed.

  6. Tim Says:

    The doctrine of the Trinity accepts that which Scripture proclaims of three persons of the Godhead, it does not completely explain or give us a full understanding of it.

    Example: At the baptism of Christ, the doctrine simply claims the Father, the Son, and the Spirit were all present, and Scripture clearly teaches the Father, the Son, the Spirit are all equally God and it also shows each are seperate. We simply acknowledge and accept what Scripture teaches, we do not assume we understand it or how it is possible.

    Oneness on the otherhand does in fact dismiss Scripture by trying to explain it away, by creating manifestations of God. By saying all three are simply one person (God) manifested three ways just because he felt like doing it?

    If the Scriptures did not teach the doctrine of the Trinity, there would be no need for any explanations from the Oneness theology.

    And if you claim the Trinity doctrine cannot explain such things, how then do you believe Oneness can? And without using Scripture? It is simply man being unable to understand God, and refusing to look at what Scripture claims concerning the jointness and seperation of the triune God.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s