Why I Reject the Trinity Part: 5
In Psalms 8:5 if you notice the difference among translations, the KJV says:
"For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels (Elohim), and hast crowned him with glory and honour."
Hebrews 2:7
“Thou madest him a little lower than the angels (aggelos); thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands”
So, allowing scripture to interpret scripture the New Testament translates the Old and claims that Elohim means the Father, men (Ps. 82:6) and now we see angels (Ps.8:5, Heb 2:7). These texts in my opinion are speaking of God family as opposed to an exclusive Trinity. I also find more harmony in God family with oneness, Spirit, Soul, and Body, as well as general natural reading of the text.
We can see that the creative Elohim of Genesis 1:26 clearly can include more meaning than the traditional view of a triune God. It includes men and angels, implying a heavenly host of God family. Also, the Hebrews had no intention of a plural form of Elohim to be seen as a three part deity. Now, understandably they could have been ignorant of this truth which God was revealing through them. Yet, to use the grammatical nature of a Hebrew word, in an attempt to negate the core Hebrew doctrine of Monotheism, seems a bit of a stretch.
The Bible does not claim that the creative Genesis 1 “us” is implying Trinity. I believe the Father was telling the heavenly hosts (Elohim) what he was going to do, and that they too have His image. I’m not implying that the hosts have creative power (I don’t know if they do or don’t) I’m saying they participated and gloried in the Father’s work. Just because man is made in the image of Elohim does not by default mean angels are not. As we saw previously angels are Elohim just as are we. We both share the image of Elohim with the Father.
The Bible does not claim that the creative Genesis 1 “us” is implying Trinity. I believe the Father was telling the heavenly hosts (Elohim) what he was going to do, and that they too have His image. I’m not implying that the hosts have creative power (I don’t know if they do or don’t) I’m saying they participated and gloried in the Father’s work. Just because man is made in the image of Elohim does not by default mean angels are not. As we saw previously angels are Elohim just as are we. We both share the image of Elohim with the Father.
I am not simply expanding the Trinity to include angels, heavenly beings, and men. I believe the core problem with the Trinity doctrine is that it doesn’t make proper distinction between Jesus, the Father, and us.
Is Jesus God? Yes, in Elohim nature, but not in the Trinitarian form. If we believe that one being is expressed in three persons then when Jesus does something it is also the Father and the Holy Spirit doing it by means of perfect agreement. Jesus’ actions are simply the current expression of that Triune being. If the Trinitarian Jesus rebukes you and is angry with you then the Father is rebuking and angry too.
Jesus says to the church, in Revelation 3:19 “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.” Yet in Isaiah 54:9 the Father is stating about our covenant to the church, “so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.”
How can this be? For those who understand the true gospel, how can “God” be completely reconciled, at peace, pleased, and not imputing sin; while at the same time irreconciled, angry, against men with a sword, and imputing sin? I don’t believe the Trinity doctrine is compatible with Paul’s gospel; this is my primary reason for rejecting it.
How can this be? For those who understand the true gospel, how can “God” be completely reconciled, at peace, pleased, and not imputing sin; while at the same time irreconciled, angry, against men with a sword, and imputing sin? I don’t believe the Trinity doctrine is compatible with Paul’s gospel; this is my primary reason for rejecting it.
more gospel: HERE
PART 6
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=11699
ReplyDeleteThe Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion -- the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another.
Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed : "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.
In
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition Gen 1:26 And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth.
27 And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
The image of God includes both Male and Female attributes.
John 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
4In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend.
This proves that God is more than one person. When Jesus was Baptised the Father spoke.
The Athanasian Creed was written in the late fourth to early fifth century. Well into the era of "church" history that I intentionally ignore.
ReplyDeleteThe Trinity doctrine is in no way the central doctrine of Christianity. For the first 325 years of the church many people had many beliefs about the topic with clusters of agreement within a wide spectrum. Just because some bishops got in a room and made some statements doesn't make the statements true.
The council of Nicea marks the birth of the imperial church. I reject that council they don't speak for me and I am not a Catholic.