I’m NOT finished about the Triune nature of God

Believe you me, I am not!  One of these days, yes—one of these days I am going to give a copy of a manuscript right here on this blog about the Jewish roots of the Trinity! Whaaat! You heard me, Jewish roots of the triune nature of God. Trust me, this “pagan-trinity-doctrine” thing, contrary to popular notion is fast becoming a old idea! I am not going to give you that manuscript now but I am going to give you link to a gentleman by the name of Rick Hoot who has found that there is life after Armstrongism and life MORE abundantly! This gentleman responding to a very popular old post on this site, A Sabbath-Keeping Church Without The Armstrongism. Here’s what he had to say,

I’m very encouraged to find others who are looking for a Sabbath keeping Church of God without Armstrongism. We organized a small, monthly Bible study fellowship in the Wash DC area about 2 years ago and now have about 10 people who attend with us (some with WCG background, some without). It is so nice to come home from services having enjoyed the Sabbath rather than enduring it. I would love to hear from others on this topic. There really is life after WCG!

I can only say “Amen!” I have also put his ministry, Didactic Ministries on my links section (those in the UCG and are tired of the annual and perennial debacles in that organization might want to take a look). This is NOT another splinter group. I looked at his beliefs section and while I may not agree with every point of doctrine (and to be honest these are what I call the non-essentials), his teachings (extrapolating from his statement of beliefs) definately fall in The Kingdom of Christ,  NOT the Kingdom of the Cults. In my comments to Libertarian Protestant Scott Nemeth, I asserted that the doctrine of the Trinity is the fine line of demarcation between The Kingdom of Christ and The Kingdom of The Cults. Rick Hoot seems, in principle to agree with that concept. His study paper on refuting the God family doctrine  is worth a read, concluding that after careful and prudent Bible study, the triune nature of God triumphs of the God family doctrine hands down! To willfully accept error and persist in error has grave spiritual consequences. We can only pray for those to learn.

 

Advertisements

HOW TO DISPROVE THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY

(Editor’s note: Got this from Stan Slonosky in Mark Tabladillo’s Jesus Loves Fellowship message board which in turned he got this from yahoo message board site biblicalapologetics. Robert M. Bowman (author of Why Should You Believe In The Trinity) is also the author of this piece below.  Those who love apologetics, like I do, enjoy!)

If you want to disprove the doctrine of the Trinity, you must
disprove one of the following propositions:

1. There is one God (i.e., one proper object of religious devotion).
2. The one God is a single divine being, the LORD (Jehovah, Yahweh).
3. The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is God.
4. The Son, Jesus Christ, is God.
5. The Holy Spirit is God.
6. The Father is not the Son.
7. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
8. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.

Anyone who affirms all eight of these propositions without
equivocation is affirming the doctrine of the Trinity, since this is
just what the doctrine of the Trinity says.

In order to dispute the doctrine of the Trinity, then, you *must*
take issue with one or more of the propositions stated above.
Anything else is tangential to the issue.

This may help you in deciding if a particular thread or post is
relevant to the truth or falsity of the doctrine. If it doesn’t
address one or more of these propositions, it isn’t relevant.

HOW TO DEFEND AN ANTI-TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY

In addition to refuting the propositions that constitute the
doctrinal content of the doctrine of the Trinity, anti-Trinitarians
have some work to do in order to show that a superior alternative
exists.

1. Present a clear alternative.

Constantly carping at things about the Trinity that you don’t like,
can’t understand, and won’t accept is not enough. You must tell us
what we should believe instead.

2. Identify the religion associated with that alternative.

It’s no good telling us that you believe X, Y, and Z instead of the
Trinity, if this “alternative” is your own private confection of
beliefs. I say this because the true doctrine of God will be held by
a community of believers in Jesus Christ, the EKKLHSIA (“church”).
Theologies do not exist in a vacuum, or in isolation. You are either
part of a church that teaches the theology you espouse, or you are
picking and choosing what you will believe from others and not
committing yourself to a _way of life_ that puts a set of teachings
into practice. Jesus Christ said that he would be with his people
until the end of the age as they engaged in the work of making
disciples, baptizing and teaching them (Matt. 28:19-20). So, what
people today are Christ’s people?

3. Show that your alternative theology does not suffer from the
defects you claim to find in Trinitarianism.

For example:

a. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for developing in
the fourth century, identify the religious tradition or movement
that predated the fourth century that you think had–and has–the
truth.

b. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for its use of
extrabiblical language, show that your theology consistently avoids
the use of all extrabiblical words.

c. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being influenced
by non-Christian philosophy or religion, show that your theology is
completely free of such influences.

d. If you criticize the doctrine of the Trinity for being difficult
to understand, show that your theology is free of anything
incoherent, confusing, paradoxical, or mysterious.

4. Demonstrate that your theology explains the full range of
biblical information better than the doctrine of the Trinity.

This means showing that your view accounts for a wider range of
biblical material, based on sound exegesis of the texts, with a
minimum of ad hoc reasoning. In other words, it is not enough to
argue that certain texts *might* be translated so as to avoid the
Trinity, or that other texts *need not* be interpreted in a
Trinitarian fashion. Rather, you must show that your non-Trinitarian
view is the *best* reading of more biblical texts than can be
claimed on the Trinitarian side.

Of course, everyone is likely to run into a text or two that is more
difficult to cohere with their position, but the right view will
have fewer of these difficulties.

Note: All such argumentation will have to contrast the anti-
Trinitarian alternative with the doctrine of the Trinity as it is
actually taught in serious works of theology, not your own
oversimplistic or fractured impression of what the doctrine means.

In Christ’s service,
Rob Bowman