Do you have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian?

StanJ

New member
And I've asked you what I have avoided or deflected from. You see, I'm happy to answer any question put to me so I'm asking you what your specific question/s is/are. I believe there are some who wish to twist the doctrine of the Trinity into something that was never intended, a dismissal of the three consubstantial persons and there is nothing in Scripture to support that. It's tough enough to find any Scripture supporting the original doctrine let alone the twisted version.

As I said, go back to my original post directed at you in this thread, and proceed from there. As you seem loathe to answer them, I am loathe to repeat them. I've given you plenty and just as you did here, you deny there is anything to address.

Yes, there is punctuation in the ancient Greek. It began about 200 years before Yeshua. It's called théseis and there are differing aspects of théseis: hypostigmḗ - a low punctus on the baseline to mark off a komma (unit smaller than a clause);
stigmḕ mésē - a punctus at midheight to mark off a clause (kōlon); and
stigmḕ teleía - a high punctus to mark off a sentence (periodos).

Most KNOW what théseis is, or at least they can look it up. This was used for those who were learning Greek, not for Greeks. Modern scholars KNOW the difference and don't need the punctuation invented by Aristophanes.
This is simply deflection on your part to justify supporting your contention that there was punctuation in the original NT manuscripts, when there was NOT. It is simply self serving to foster acceptance of your fallacious POV.
http://greek-language.com/grklinguist/?p=657


Now you're just being obtuse.

Why? Because I won't leave you wriggle room to equivocate? Trust me that is NOT being obtuse, and I'm sure you know it. Just like you know you are avoiding answering this.


I didn't say that. I did post J.P. Green's Interlinear as well as the UBS' Greek/English Interlinear translation of John 1:18 , specifically the words "in the bosom of the Father" which is found in the KJV 1611 and all subsequent versions of the KJV. You threw my understanding of English context regarding John 1:18 into question and I have merely pointed out that my understanding of the context is the same as many other peoples understanding, that being that Yeshua is not God the Father, He is the Son of God, "in the bosom of the Father." Seeing as how you stated "It says what it says," and you have such an aversion to Hebrew, I thought I'd point out to you that Scripture never said "Jesus" but rather Iesous in the Greek and that is what was in the Geneva before Kingeth Jameth began the 1611 revision of the Bishop's Bible of 1568, neither of which had "j's" in them either. We all would be wise to stay abreast of changes made to Scripture.

Well it was inferred, and these two have nothing to do with the KJV, which was done in 1611, as the AV confirms. Regardless, what is the bosom of the Father, if the Father is God and Spirit? The fact that you strive about this word shows you are not really sure what it indicates. FYI the Greek word κόλπος (kolpos), used here for bosom, is NOT in John 13:23, but the KJV still uses bosom. So you can either start using more modern translations to facilitate your understanding of God's written word, or you can stick with the 400+ years old non-relative English of the KJV.
Bottom line here, is that you strive about a word for nothing more than subverting those who don't know any better. I am NOT one of those.

I believe I've been making plenty of points. I can not force you to acknowledge them. It's like bringing a horse to water....

and ignored my refutations to them, which basically invalidates them.


When I converse with someone, Stan, it is with the reasonable expectation that they are keeping track of their own words so they can keep up their end of the conversation. If I wanted to converse with myself, I would, but in this case I am conversing (albeit in writing) with you. You stated, "It says what it says..." and my point to you is that it does not say what you and others say it says. It doesn't say that Yeshua is God Himself. Not even Yeshua states that He is God the Father despite those verses you repeatedly post.

and yet you ask me to remind you of your answers or what you didn't answer? That seems awfully convenient for you.
Jesus said He is God Himself, and I've given you His words, which you have ignored. From experience, it doesn't help for me to continually quote scripture you refuse to address, or avoid doing so. You last sentence above clearly indicates your unwillingness to ACCEPT what God's word and Jesus DOES say.
Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.
Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

Jesus said: “Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am!”


His words stand very clearly on their own as the "Cautions in Application" section at that site declares. Thank you for posting that url. It supports my statements.

Yes, His words do stand on their own, so I suggest you read them clearly and take off your dogmatic glasses that distort the truth of scripture.
 

Apple7

New member
Once again, you have been unable to show that the scriptures teach the Trinity, much less that the scriptures demand a person must believe in the Trinity to be a Christian.

Your denial of the plain words of scripture is noted.


We have already shown you numerous examples mandating that true worship to The Creator be as He has revealed Himself, Triune.

Scripture owns you.

Seven.

Ways.

To.

Sundown.


:cigar:
 

StanJ

New member
I have a problem with anyone trying to prove what is beyond their scope to prove especially when it's unnecessary to prove it. That aside, Stan, if people want to state that Yeshua is God (the Father) what becomes of the Headship? That POV destroys the Headship. It diminishes Yeshua's obedience to God. No...it literally destroys the necessity for Yeshua to be obedient to God. It's a flat out destructive train of thought; one that I refuse to subscribe to. Immanu-el (another of those Hebrew words you dislike) means God with us but I take that to mean, from all else in Scripture, that God came to us through His Son not that He was/is His Son. To state otherwise is also to call Yeshua a liar.

John 5:19 "Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

John 12:49 "For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken."

John 8:28 “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me."

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

The fact is, that he has proven it IS within his scope, despite those who refuse to accept it. I've know the truth way before I heard of him, but he just confirms for some who need academia to support or show them their misunderstanding. If someone feels they know it all and will not accept instruction, then nobody will change their minds.
Headship is a non issue here, because Jesus himself submitted to God in His hypostatic relationship with Him. He acknowledged this when He stated; Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.


This is no different than the man being the head of the wife but also that we should ALL submit to one another. You obviously don't understand headship.
I also find it disingenuous that you quote scripture when you ignore all others I have given you. You can't pick and choose which is OK and which is not IMJ...you must accept them ALL.




 

IMJerusha

New member
The fact is, that he has proven it IS within his scope, despite those who refuse to accept it.

I haven't stated that anything is outside of God's scope. My point is that no man can demand that Trinitarianism be accepted in order to be a Christian and God certainly didn't.

I've know the truth way before I heard of him, but he just confirms for some who need academia to support or show them their misunderstanding. If someone feels they know it all and will not accept instruction, then nobody will change their minds.

I don't refer to Scripture as academia, Stan. Nowhere in Scripture is it written that Yeshua is the Father.

Headship is a non issue here, because Jesus himself submitted to God in His hypostatic relationship with Him. He acknowledged this when He stated; Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.


This is no different than the man being the head of the wife but also that we should ALL submit to one another. You obviously don't understand headship.

You've just proven that Headship has a lot to do with it and that Yeshua is the Son, not the Father.

I also find it disingenuous that you quote scripture when you ignore all others I have given you.

I haven't ignored the Scripture you've posted, Stan. I've only stated that it doesn't mean what you seem to think it means, that the Son is the Father. You have no right as a believer to find adherence to Scripture disingenuous but I've already made that point. No believer has that right.

You can't pick and choose which is OK and which is not IMJ...you must accept them ALL.

I do accept all of Scripture, Stan. I simply don't apply meanings to it that the Father or the Son didn't.
 

StanJ

New member
I haven't stated that anything is outside of God's scope. My point is that no man can demand that Trinitarianism be accepted in order to be a Christian and God certainly didn't.

Of course you have if you don't acknowledge who and what He actually is. If you don't acknowledge that Jesus is the I AM as He said, then you don't confess the REAL Jesus, hence you cannot be a real Christian. God says it and so does Jesus.


Nowhere in Scripture is it written that Yeshua is the Father.

Really? How about Is 9:6?
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.


You've just proven that Headship has a lot to do with it and that Yeshua is the Son, not the Father.

He is both in his hypostatic nature as Heb 1:3 (NIV)

I haven't ignored the Scripture you've posted, Stan. I've only stated that it doesn't mean what you seem to think it means, that the Son is the Father. You have no right as a believer to find adherence to Scripture disingenuous but I've already made that point. No believer has that right.

If you can't defend you Uni POV, then you can't. 2 Tim 2:15 gives me that right IMJ,


I do accept all of Scripture, Stan. I simply don't apply meanings to it that the Father or the Son didn't.

You can't APPLY your own meaning to what the scriptures CLEARLY convey, especially when you actually don't exegete any of your opinions WITH scripture.
Denial does NOT make your POV valid. 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV) makes that clear.
 

IMJerusha

New member
Of course you have if you don't acknowledge who and what He actually is. If you don't acknowledge that Jesus is the I AM as He said, then you don't confess the REAL Jesus, hence you cannot be a real Christian. God says it and so does Jesus.

Except that Yeshua didn't state that He is the I AM. He stated "Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am!" In other words, Yeshua is stating that He existed before Abraham was born, and that He existed at that very moment and exists in the future. Yeshua bears the same omnipresent characteristic as the Father as He is in the bosom of the Father. Stan, if Yeshua is the Father, why doesn't He know when He will return?

Really? How about Is 9:6?
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

What about it? I don't dispute any of this but it is not a statement that Yeshua is the Father. Matthew 24:36

He is both in his hypostatic nature as Heb 1:3 (NIV)

Hebrews 1:3 does not state that the Son is the Father.

If you can't defend you Uni POV, then you can't. 2 Tim 2:15 gives me that right IMJ,

I have defended my point of view. I don't know what you mean by Uni POV. More importantly, I have defended, by Scripture, the Father's position as well as Yeshua's. If my posit were against Scripture, you would have that right, but it is not.

You can't APPLY your own meaning to what the scriptures CLEARLY convey, especially when you actually don't exegete any of your opinions WITH scripture. Denial does NOT make your POV valid. 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV) makes that clear.

That is exactly what I have been stating to you. 1 Peter 3:15 does not confirm that the Son is the Father. Additionally, all gentleness and respect does not include announcing that one is not a Christian if they don't have the same doctrinal POV as you do. It is not doctrine that saves.
 
Last edited:

StanJ

New member
Except that Yeshua didn't state that He is the I AM. He stated "Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am!" In other words, Yeshua is stating that He existed before Abraham was born, and that He existed at that very moment and exists in the future. Yeshua bears the same omnipresent characteristic as the Father as He is in the bosom of the Father. Stan, if Yeshua is the Father, why doesn't He know when He will return?

That you can't or won't see the context of scripture and how it is rendered is part of the reason you don't get what Jesus says when He says it. There is 'no other words' as you put it. Jesus said what He said. Just like God said what He said in Ex 3:14. It means the same in both verses. Obviously Jesus did not exist before Abraham, so who was speaking when Jesus said what He said here?
You'll find the answer in John 1:14.

What about it? I don't dispute any of this but it is not a statement that Yeshua is the Father. Matthew 24:36

Really? You don't see the words EVERLASTING FATHER in Is 9:6?

Hebrews 1:3 does not state that the Son is the Father.

Not if you don't know how to read, or don't understand what hypostasis is.
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.



I have defended my point of view. I don't know what you mean by Uni POV. More importantly, I have defended, by Scripture, the Father's position as well as Yeshua's. If my posit were against Scripture, you would have that right, but it is not.

I mean you don't accept the triune nature of God, so you are basically a unitarian, despite your Messianic claim, and you have NOT defended your POV with corroborative scripture.

That is exactly what I have been stating to you. 1 Peter 3:15 does not confirm that the Son is the Father. Additionally, all gentleness and respect does not include announcing that one is not a Christian if they don't have the same doctrinal POV as you do. It is not doctrine that saves.

No it doesn't, but it does confirm you have no idea what I refer to in each post, or you just don't read my replies to each of your posts.
You being personally offended by God's word and perspective is not MY problem, it's yours. Indeed Jesus, our God and Saviour, isn the one who saves. If you don't confess who that is then you can't be saved now can you?
 
Last edited:

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
That you can't or won't see the context of scripture and how it rendered is part of the reason you don't get what Jesus says when He says it. There is 'no other words' as you put it. Jesus said what He said. Just like God said what He said in Ex 3:14. It means the same in both verses. Obviously Jesus did not exist before Abraham, so who was speaking when Jesus said what He said here?
You'll find the answer in John 1:14.



Really? You don't see the words EVERLASTING FATHER in Is 9:6?



Not if you don't know how to read, or don't understand what hypostasis is.
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.





I mean you don't accept the triune nature of God, so you are basically a unitarian, despite your Messianic claim, and you have NOT defended your POV with corroborative scripture.



No it doesn't, but it does confirm you have no idea what I refer to in each post, or you just don't read my replies to each of your posts.
You being personally offended by God's word and perspective is not MY problem, it's yours. Indeed Jesus, our God and Saviour, isn the one who saves. If you don't confess who that is then you can't be saved now can you?

Not that God came in the flesh.........


1 John 4:2 KJV


2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:



trinitarian Anti- christ......

1 John 4:3 KJV


3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come ; and even now already is it in the world.

Lucky for this lame that speaking against the son is forgivable.

:chuckle:
 

Omniskeptical

BANNED
Banned
Granville Sharp was wrong.

Granville Sharp was wrong.

Granville Sharp wasn't someone who well trained in Greek, and reading the rule; one can't help but notice how similar it is to English. If Granville Sharp had studied the article correctly, he would notice how it is rarely before names, and how it is used before indefinite things like prepositions, infinitives, and as indefinite pronoun, and to make αυτος indefinite.

While Greek uses και-- ie 'and', to separate nouns; it only separates the first noun before the later describing nouns, the appositional nouns. Then later appositional nouns can be separated by και also.

Thus we have two flaws in his scholarship,

1. He assumes the article is definite and like English 'the' rather than a/an'. The Determiner is not definite, but nouns without it, those in Greek are.

2. He doesn't how και needs a singular or plural common noun to connect objects of the same type.
 

StanJ

New member
Granville Sharp wasn't someone who well trained in Greek, and reading the rule; one can't help but notice how similar it is to English. If Granville Sharp had studied the article correctly, he would notice how it is rarely before names, and how it is used before indefinite things like prepositions, infinitives, and as indefinite pronoun, and to make αυτος indefinite.
While Greek uses και-- ie 'and', to separate nouns; it only separates the first noun before the later describing nouns, the appositional nouns. Then later appositional nouns can be separated by και also.
Thus we have two flaws in his scholarship,
1. He assumes the article is definite and like English 'the' rather than a/an'. The Determiner is not definite, but nouns without it, those in Greek are.
2. He doesn't how και needs a singular or plural common noun to connect objects of the same type.

He IS acknowledged as a master in Greek grammatical rules and most of the pre-eminent Greek scholars of our day acknowledge the Granville Sharp rule. It is also very true in English when 2 nouns are separated by AND, as they are in 2 Peter 1:1, that they refer to the same person.
You may like your user name, but it only reflects your rebellious nature to the TRUTH of Scripture.
 

Omniskeptical

BANNED
Banned
He IS acknowledged as a master in Greek grammatical rules and most of the pre-eminent Greek scholars of our day acknowledge the Granville Sharp rule. It is also very true in English when 2 nouns are separated by AND, as they are in 2 Peter 1:1, that they refer to the same person.
You may like your user name, but it only reflects your rebellious nature to the TRUTH of Scripture.
Granville Sharp was a badly self-trained scholar. I have nothing against self-training, but his myths about the greek article are worthless. Since there aren't mucho secular Koine scholars, it is easy to say that biblical scholars agree with his and their own crappy research.

You can call me MythBuster, if you don't like the other name.

And if you don't believe God to be a sadist, get over it.
 

StanJ

New member
Granville Sharp was a badly self-trained scholar. I have nothing against self-training, but his myths about the greek article are worthless. Since there aren't mucho secular Koine scholars, it is easy to say that biblical scholars agree with his and their own crappy research.
You can call me MythBuster, if you don't like the other name.
And if you don't believe God to be a sadist, get over it.

This is NOT factual, but them again NOT surprising coming from you.

Learn a thing or two.
https://bible.org/article/sharp-redivivus-reexamination-granville-sharp-rule
 

Omniskeptical

BANNED
Banned
This is NOT factual, but the[n] again NOT surprising coming from you.

Learn a thing or two.
https://bible.org/article/sharp-redivivus-reexamination-granville-sharp-rule
There is no reason for me to waste my time. The articular constructs in Hebrew, Aramaic, or easily recognizable as making nouns in definite. But Wallace is not so terse, or competent with Greek grammar. He may be good identifying words in cursive Koine, but like most Koine scholars, his ability to translate correctly is suspect.

For example, the name YHWH never has an article around it. There is only one, and there can't be another contradicting him/it. To say 'A Yahweh' makes no sense.
 
Last edited:

Bright Raven

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Gotquestions.org

Question: "What are the essentials of the Christian faith?"

Answer: The Bible itself reveals what is important and essential to the Christian faith. These essentials are the deity of Christ, salvation by God’s grace and not by works, salvation through Jesus Christ alone, the resurrection of Christ, the Gospel, monotheism and the Holy Trinity. These are the main “essentials” that we should understand and believe if we are followers of Jesus Christ. Let’s look at all of these in a little more detail.

The deity of Christ. Quite simply, Jesus is God. While Jesus never directly says, “I am God” in the Scriptures, He makes it very clear to those around Him, especially the Pharisees and Sadducees, that He is God. John 10:30 says, “I and the Father are one.” Jesus was claiming deity, and, interestingly enough, He did not deny that He was God. Another example is John 20:28, when Thomas says, “My Lord and my God!” Again, Jesus does not correct Him by saying that He is not God. There are many other examples one can find in the Scriptures regarding Jesus’ rightful place in heaven.

Salvation by grace. We are all sinners separated from God and deserving of eternal punishment for our sin. Jesus’ death on the cross paid for the sins of mankind, giving us access to heaven and an eternal relationship with God. God did not have to do this for us, but He loves us so much that He sacrificed His only Son. This is grace, and it is most definitely undeserved favor. Scripture tells us, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God not by works, so that no one can boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). There is nothing we can do to earn God’s favor or gain access to heaven apart from His grace.

Salvation through Jesus Christ alone. A truly provocative question to ask someone might be “Do all roads lead to God?” The truth is that all roads do lead to God. Eventually, we are all going to stand before God when we die, no matter what faith we are. It is there that we will be judged for what we have or have not done while we were alive and whether Jesus Christ is Lord of our lives. For the majority of people, this will be a terrible occasion, as most will not know Him or be known by Him. For these people, hell will be the final destination. But God in His mercy has provided all of us the only means for salvation through His Son, Jesus Christ. Acts 4:12 tells us that “salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.” This passage speaks of the name of Jesus and His saving power. Another example is found in the book of John. Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). No one gets into heaven except by faith in the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ on his or her behalf.

The resurrection of Christ. Perhaps no other event in the Bible, aside from Jesus’ appearance here on earth and subsequent death on the cross, is as significant to the Christian faith as that of the resurrection. Why is this event significant? The answer lies in the fact that Jesus died and then after three days came back to life and rose again to reappear to His followers in bodily form. Jesus had already demonstrated His ability to resurrect others such as His friend Lazarus. But now God the Father had resurrected Him to display His awesome power and glory. This amazing fact is what separates the Christian faith from all others. All other religions are based on works or a powerless deity or person. The leaders of all other religions die and remain dead. The Christian faith is based on Christ crucified and resurrected to life. “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Lastly, to deny Christ’s bodily resurrection (John 2:19-21) is to deny that Jesus’ work here on earth was a satisfactory offering to God for the sins of mankind.

The gospel. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul spells out what the gospel is and how important it is to embrace it and share it with others. He reminds the Corinthians of the gospel he preached among them: “That Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.” This is the essence of the gospel. Paul also warns us to be wary of the many “false gospels” that are being offered to the unsuspecting: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:8-9). The pure gospel of Jesus Christ—His death on the cross for sinners and His resurrection to everlasting life—is central to the Christian faith.

Monotheism. Quite simply, there is only one God. Exodus 20:3 states very powerfully, “You shall have no other gods before me.” Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God to be worshipped and served. “‘You are my witnesses,’ declares the LORD, ‘and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me’” (Isaiah 43:10). Here we see that we are to “believe” and “understand” that God lives and is one. A Christian will know that there is only one God, the God of the Bible. All other “gods” are false and are no gods at all. “For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6).

The Holy Trinity. While the concept of a “three-in-one God” is not represented by a single verse or passage, it is described frequently throughout Scripture. If we look at Matthew 28:19, we see the verse calling out the Trinity: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” While this verse mentions all three Persons of the triune God, it does not call them the Trinity. So to understand the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, we must look at the “totality” of Scripture and glean from it the definition. In 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, we see how this comes together: “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.” Again, we see all three Persons being represented but not titled the Holy Trinity.

Finally, the essentials of Christianity would not be complete without the ingredient that binds everything together—faith. “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). As Christians we live by this verse with the understanding that we believe in a God we cannot see. But we see His work in our lives and all around us in His creation. We do all of this through faith because we know that faith pleases God. “And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him” (Hebrews 11:6).
 

genuineoriginal

New member
My point is that no man can demand that Trinitarianism be accepted in order to be a Christian and God certainly didn't.
You are right in saying that God does not demand that anyone accept Trinitarianism in order to be a Christian.
The demand to believe in Trinitarianism came about from the power struggle that happened between 325 and 381 where the church in Rome was trying to exert doctrinal dominance over all the churches.
The Church of Rome needed some proof that the other churches were following their proclamations over the plain language of scripture, and the Trinitarian doctrine proved to be just the thing.
 

keypurr

Well-known member
BR, your stuck in the rut of traditional fairy tales.

No verse tells us that Jesus said he is God.


.
 
Top