CHRISTIAN APOSTOLIC ANSWERS
The Bible on:
One God | Salvation |
Baptism | Faith
Part 1 | Part 2 |
Touch and Agree? | One Body? | One Liners
Preaching: 500 words more or
I WANT TO BE SAVED!
Things that must be true if there is a Trinity.
Someone somewhere in the Bible would have mentioned it. As the previous
exercise has shown, no one in the Old or New Testament specifically mentions the Trinity
or a triune God. If you have taken the first part of this challenge you have also seen that
no body has described the Trinity either. If being a Trinitarian is so crucial to salvation
why didn't Jesus stress the importance of adherence to this teaching? Why didn't Paul
explain the nature of the Trinity when he was explaining the Godhead to the Colossians
If the doctrine of the Trinity is true then God withheld this information from
Jesus and the Apostles. Are we to believe that God has seen fit to reveal such a
monumental truth to the authors of the Nicene Creed and not to Jesus or Paul? Are we to
believe, as those of this doctrine profess, that Jesus withheld this part of the gospel from
the Apostles and that through a "new" revelation God has shown this doctrine to the
"early church fathers"? Was Jesus in the dark about the Trinity? Apart from the absurdity
of that question consider: Matthew 11:25-27, "At that time Jesus answered and said, I
thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from
the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it
seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man
knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and
[he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]. " Jesus Himself says that no man will have
any revelation or knowledge of the Father unless He gives it to them and that "all things"
given unto Him. By the context of this passage He means all knowledge of who the
Father is. Those who formulated the Trinitarian doctrine, and it was "formulated" as I will
discuss at a latter date, never claimed Divine inspiration but were in a pinch to present a
unified front before the Emperor Constantine.
Consider that Paul nor any other Apostle ever preached the Trinity. Now
consider this statement: Galatians 1:6-8, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him
that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but
there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we,
or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have
preached unto you, let him be accursed. " The answer is simple: the doctrine of the
Trinity is a different one than Paul preached. I have been accused of being intolerant and
dogmatic and as you can see this puts me in the company of Jesus and the Apostles for
which I am unworthy but
grateful. Jesus said that He is "the" way, not "a" way. This is intolerance at in it's purest
form. The plan (Logos or Word) of salvation is totally, supremely exclusive to any
exceptions. Paul said that if even he himself were to change what he had already preached
to the Galatians that they (or himself) should be consigned to Hell forever. I'd say that is
If believing in the Trinity is the only way to be saved then Jesus failed in His
mission. If Jesus was ordained by the Father to bring the way of salvation to mankind
and believing in the Trinity is the only way to be saved then why didn't Jesus say so? Jesus
never even hinted that one must believe in a triune God to be saved. Why would He leave
such a crucial element out of the formula? I have heard it said that mankind wasn't ready
for the "whole" revelation of the truth. If Jesus came in the "fullness" of time did He
indeed come with a partial revelation to a people incapable of understanding the plan of
salvation? I think we answered that above but consider: John15:15, "Henceforth I call
you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you
friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you." Here
Jesus says He has told everything to the Apostles that He has heard of the Father. Also consider: Matthew 13:10-11, "And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. " in
which Jesus says that the Apostles are the ones 'given to understand the kingdom of God." Excuse
me but I don't find where Jesus explain the Trinity anywhere and neither can you. Are we to
believe that Jesus had the job of delivering the words of life to God's most prized of all
creation and left out the most important part. If Jesus and the Apostles never required a
belief in the Trinity to be saved I like to would know on what authority anyone can require
If the Trinity were so crucial then why did Jesus say "I and my Father are one" and not "I and my Father are three in one." Let
say at this point that the word "one" in the Old and New Testaments means just that: one.
It grieves my heart when a so called preacher will try to imply that the evidence for the
Trinity is "hidden" in the subtle meanings of the ancient text. This is just the attitude of
the Scribes of Jesus' day. I heard one such man say that the word "echad" translated "one"
in Deuteronomy 6:4 was also used in the text that says a man and his wife are "one" flesh.
He then went on to have his wife stand after making a display of searching for her making
it obvious that they were "two" and not one. First, this gives the impression that this is the
only two places in the Old Testament this word appears. The word "echad" appears 951
times in the Old Testament and it always means "one". One rib from Adam, one sheep,
one tree, one rock, one man and one God. What about the "preachers" demonstration?
Come out of your carnal mind for a moment. Consider if you will that my hand is
one flesh with my shoulder. The connection to my shoulder and thereby the rest of "me"
achieved by means of my arm. The arm is my hand's flesh connection to the rest of my
body making hand, arm, shoulder and the rest one flesh. I am not a collection of
independent parts living in harmony but one part with areas of diverse function or different
uses. Now imagine if you will a wedding. When a man and woman are "united" God
establishes a spiritual link just as real as my arm is to my hand between the man and his
wife making them truly one flesh.
If there were to be a new revelation it would have been predicted. The
revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity would be on a par with the first advent or arrival
of Christ. Where are the prophesies that predict the "unveiling" of this "deeper"
understanding of the
Godhead? I have heard it said that the Trinity was so accepted among the Jews that there
was no need to mention it. In this day when even the doctrine that sin in any form in any
person is unacceptable but forgivable is questioned, I find it hard to believe that God was so short sighted
as to leave such a monumental thing as the Trinity out. He went to such trouble to explain in great
detail many other aspects of salvation that were perfectly obvious so as to leave no room
for error. Why would He skip such a "trivial" point as the Godhead?
This will do for starters.
More later. If you have any questions at all write me!