The strength of Trinity on the cross?

[Penguin]

I've been reading a lot of scripture lately on the Trinity, a vast subject
If I may, I'll come straight to my question:-

Does the submission and desparation of Jesus showed on the cross to the Father disprove or question the Trinity?

[Abdillah]

The creed of trinity is that all three persons of the trinity are "co-equal" and "co-eternal". This seems to be questioned by the fact that Jesus on many occassions illustrated how he is subservient to the "Father".

The Father is greater than I (John 14:28)

No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son (jesus) but only the Father (Matthew 24:36)

These and many other passages show that Jesus considered himself inferior to God, whom He referred to as "father". He even explained that his own knowledge is limited, it is only God who is all-Knowing, and that he also has a different will than God's will: yet not my will, but yours be done (Luke 22:42)


Christian apologist argue that Jesus has two natures, one is divine and other is human. All the verses which point to Jesus inferiority, they argue, are in relation to Jesus' human nature. What this practically means is that Christians believe God has multiple personality disorder

This is the biggest hole in the trinity theory, it raises too many questions, too many problems, and too much confusion. It is would be lot easier and lot simpler to simply believe in One God as One Person, end of story.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Penguin

I've been reading a lot of scripture lately on the Trinity, a vast subject
If I may, I'll come straight to my question:-

Does the submission and desparation of Jesus showed on the cross to the Father disprove or question the Trinity?

It shows he was truely human, that he suffered, and he died.

Muslims consider it shameful, Jews considered it shameful, but Christians consider it an act of perfect love and self-sacrifice. God died for us.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Does the submission and desparation of Jesus showed on the cross to the Father disprove or question the Trinity?

Nope.

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by Penguin

I've been reading a lot of scripture lately on the Trinity, a vast subject
If I may, I'll come straight to my question:-

Does the submission and desparation of Jesus showed on the cross to the Father disprove or question the Trinity?

As I understand it there exist differences in interpretation of what was said on the cross. One such interpretation is "Father is this what you saved me for" As a final revelation along with forgive them, for they know not what they do.

As you are aware I am sure, the doctrine of the trinity occurred years after, and the debate has raged on.

[Penguin]

For me the Trinity itself isn't hard to understand at all, it's how to "apply" it at specific points when reading the scriptures that is the challenge.
I am riding a Theological rollercoaster with it at the moment, going all over the place up and down.
A being was God in the flesh on the cross. Why feel abandoned from God the Father WHEN YOU ARE GOD?? Pleading, when you already are the Trinity!

[Dream]

Why not give yourself a break from pursuing the topic? Even after you've figured it out, it doesn't get any easier to explain, and there are much more important things to do such as taking care of your loved ones. Take the time to write a letter to someone, and you have profited the world 30 to 100 times more than white knuckling it through any doctrinal topic.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Penguin

For me the Trinity itself isn't hard to understand at all, it's how to "apply" it at specific points when reading the scriptures that is the challenge.

Interesting ... it's like the quote from Augustine on time: 'when no-one asks me, I know what it is; when someone asks, I don't know'

Originally Posted by Penguin

A being was God in the flesh on the cross. Why feel abandoned from God the Father WHEN YOU ARE GOD?? Pleading, when you already are the Trinity!

Remember that Jesus' humanity was not a sham, He was not man in form or appearance only, but man actually ... He suffered as man suffers: hunger, thirst, fear, pain ... on the Cross God suffers in silence, it is man who cries out as a man in fear, pain, despair, desolation.

To understand that, you need to go into the idea of two natures, divine and human, in the one person, and how each operates unimpeded and unimpaired within its own sphere of operation ... thus Christ can work signs and miracles in the spirit, and suffer and die in the flesh.

Thomas

[Abdillah]

Here's a question, the first thing you want to teach your children is about God. You want to tell them basic things. Like we Muslims teach our children Allah is One, we help them memorize His names, teach them to read Quran, etc. very basic things. What about Christians? How do they explain the intricacies of the trinity and hypostatic union to a four year old girl for example? God is simple to understand, He is One, like Jesus said. That's something any four year old child can understand.

[BlaznFattyz]

Originally Posted by Abdillah

What about Christians? How do they explain the intricacies of the trinity and hypostatic union to a four year old girl for example? God is simple to understand, He is One, like Jesus said. That's something any four year old child can understand.

I never had any problem understanding it as a child. I saw that Jesus was the Word of God as God, and He came to be my saviour, and the Holy Spirit came from God also and came to teach me and comfort me, so it is all God reaching out to me in a way He knows i can receive Him. When God the Father is knowable, undertandable which is through Jesus and the Spirit, then I understand God and how He loves me. This is basic stuff that is taught to children in christian churches. From there we go on to study more advanced things as we mature.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Dream

Why not give yourself a break from pursuing the topic? Even after you've figured it out, it doesn't get any easier to explain, and there are much more important things to do such as taking care of your loved ones. Take the time to write a letter to someone, and you have profited the world 30 to 100 times more than white knuckling it through any doctrinal topic.

Indeed, I think I will. Good idea.
The point I try to make is being missed.

[mee]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

God died for us.

its better to stick to what the bible really teaches , the bible says the following .

He (Jehovah God)who did not even spare his own Son but delivered him up for us all, why will he not also with him kindly give us all other things? ROMANS 8;32

For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.
For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him.
John 3;16-17

By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world that we might gain life through him
1JOHN 4;9


The love is in this respect, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent forth his Son as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins.1 JOHN 4;10


"The Father loves me," Jesus said.

Do you know why he loves Jesus and why we should too?— Because Jesus was willing to die so that God’s will could be done. (John 10:17)

So let’s do what the Bible tells us: Become imitators of God, as beloved children, and go on walking in love, just as the Christ also loved you and delivered himself up for you.
.

Therefore, become imitators of God, as beloved children, and go on walking in love, just as the Christ also loved YOU and delivered himself up for YOU as an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling odor.EPHESIANS 5;1-2


To put into perspective what Jesus was willing to do, think about this:

What man would leave his family and home and move to a foreign land if he knew that most of its inhabitants would reject him, that he would be subjected to humiliation and suffering, and that he would finally be murdered?

Consider now what Jesus did.

Before coming to earth, he had a favored position in the heavens alongside his Father. Yet, Jesus willingly left his heavenly home and came to earth as a human.

He made this move, knowing that he would be rejected by the majority and that he would be subjected to cruel humiliation, intense suffering, and a painful death. (Philippians 2:5-7)

Love moved Jehovah to send forth his beloved Son. (Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:9) In turn, love moved Jesus to "taste death for every man." (Hebrews 2:9; John 15:13)

Jesus died at 33 1/2 years of age. But on the third day after his death he was resurrected to life.

Forty days later he returned to heaven. (Acts 1:3, 9-11)

There, as a spirit person once more, he appeared "before the person of God for us," carrying the value of his ransom sacrifice. (Hebrews 9:12, 24)
At that time the ransom was paid to God in heaven. Deliverance was now available for humankind.

[mee]

Originally Posted by wil

As you are aware I am sure, the doctrine of the trinity occurred years after, and the debate has raged on.

And there we have the answer .
many things have made their way into the teachings just as Jesus forewarned.
and many have been misled by those teachings .



The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament:
‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.


The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.


In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.



According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions."—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.


John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: "The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."—(New York, 1965), p. 899.




the testimony of the Bible and of history makes clear that the Trinity was unknown throughout Biblical times and for several centuries thereafter.

Many persons think the trinity is a Christian teaching based on God’s Word, the Bible.
However, early Roman Catholic writers did not hesitate to admit that the trinity could not be proved by Scripture alone.

Still there are persons who insist that the doctrine of the trinity is a Christian doctrine based on the Holy Scriptures. Let us briefly examine and see.

First of all, the words "trinity," "triune," "God-man," "first person," "second person," "third person," "three persons," do not appear anywhere in the inspired text of either Catholic or Protestant Bibles.

Nowhere in the Bible do we find terms such as "God the Son," or "God the Holy Spirit," but rather we read "the Son of God," "the spirit of God," or just "holy spirit."

Nowhere in Scripture is God revealed as three persons, but always as one God. Now if the very words that are necessary to express the doctrine of the trinity do not appear in the Holy Scriptures, how can we suppose the doctrine to be found or taught therein? Impossible.

[Dondi]

The basic argument in favor of the Trinity is that Jesus was sinless. That though He had a human nature prone to temptation, He never sinned. There was something about Him that stood Him apart from the rest of humanity. The theory is that in order to be sinless He would have to take on a Divine nature as there is no one 'good' but God (He said so Himself). Ergo, He must somehow be God, or at least have such a connection to God as to have been fully obedient to that Divine nature.

How could someone of Jesus' stature have been so perfect? Is He God, or did He rely so heavily on the Spirit of God that He managed to not sin? Do we have that same ability through the Spirit ourselves?

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Dondi

The theory is that in order to be sinless He would have to take on a Divine nature as there is no one 'good' but God (He said so Himself). Ergo, He must somehow be God, or at least have such a connection to God as to have been fully obedient to that Divine nature.

How could someone of Jesus' stature have been so perfect? Is He God, or did He rely so heavily on the Spirit of God that He managed to not sin? Do we have that same ability through the Spirit ourselves?

I like the use of "divine nature" and "connection" here dondi, nice one!


Can I just say to everybody that I am pondering the applicability of the Trinity when Christ was doing his work on the cross ONLY.
So if people could read my original post properly instead of trying to make out I am bloody thick or something I would appreciate it.