Oh, how we so love the comfort of the traditions of men. The doctrine of the “Trinity” is surely one of the great hoodwink hallmarks of those very traditions. How long has the organized church packaged and stamped the falsity of the “Trinity”?
Read it! Attack it! Give it your best shot traditionalists and church goers and keep it short (Pratt) lol
Is God a Closed TRINITY or an Open FAMILY?
What’s up Ran, missed you bro. 
I’ll answer the question in the thread title while keeping it short and simple. The union of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit has always been and always will be simple.
Yes, in a word, “ONE”
Short and simple #1: can’t have a “family” without distinct persons. If the Father and the Son (not even counting the Holy Spirit, too) are not distinct persons, but are only modes of operation, then there is no interpersonal relationship of love going on there. Father and Son (and Spirit) are a personal relationship, and could be called a family. Father, King and Judge are modes of operation, not a personal relationship, and even though true as modes of operation cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called a family.
Short and simple #2: that goes for human identity, too. Dissolution of human identity equals no family. “Open” inclusion into “God” for all humans, means nothing amounting to a “family” if the apparent distinctions of person in God are only modes of operation. At best, humans only become further modes of God’s operation; and might be best described as God only playacting with fictions God created. (No matter how good a novelist I am, the people in my novels don’t really exist; they cannot have real love between each other, or with me. They’re only me, playacting all the parts; or at best subconsciously subsuming myself so that the characters might surprise me by fictively ‘wanting’ to do things or coming up with ideas supposedly ‘themselves’.)
True love requires a real distinction of persons, whether within God, or between God and not-God entities.
Short and simple #3: the administration’s tolerance for people showing up to call those who teach a belief intentional deceivers (“hoodwink”-ers), is running pretty low right now.
Very much in agreement with you on your short list Jason; a list which could be much longer. But especially with this #3. I would only alter it however (for myself)
**from “pretty low” to “practically non-existant” and from “right now” to “from here on”…
**
But to the topic itself, I find it fascinating that there really does seem (in my experience at least) to be an uptick in the number of folks who find the doctrine of the Trinity to be so threatening to them. Just not sure the appeal of denying the doctrine.
I doubt I’ve ever met a Trinity believer who did not have great respect for the years – centuries really – of how this explanation formed and solidified. Further, the great respect for the notion that there remains a deep awareness that there really is likely even more to this relationship expressed in what we call the Trinity which we are as now incapable of grasping. It seems that the core doctrines of the Christian faith – things like creation, Incarnation, Resurrection, Trinity etc – really do have elements of mystery to them. Which is simply to agree, humbly, with Paul who notes that we see through a glass darkly…
Some believe, however, that their glass is less dark than that of others…
Hmmm…
TotalVictory
Bobx3
I am, too! (I think! 
)
Well it seems to me that, for Trinitarians, their glass is clear enough for them to know with a good deal of certainty that those who deny the Trinity are quite mistaken. 
Apparently the glass isn’t too dark for them, as they have been able to peer into and probe the very nature of the Eternal One and walk away with the knowledge that “he” is exactly three persons sharing exactly one substance or essence, and that one of these divine persons possesses not one but exactly two natures. And at least according to one Trinitarian (James, above), “the union of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit has always been and always will be simple” (emphasis mine).
That was good Aaron. Deleted by Moderator
Well, for what it’s worth, I have always consistently maintained that the doctrine is both complex and not easily provable (whether from scriptural exegesis or metaphysics). 
Kind of like real life… 
But I don’t blame non-trins for not just jumping on the doctrinal bandwagon.
When we recognize, that the carnal soul loves to hide in the darkness of complexity and confusion, whereby it’s condition goes undetected, we have also discovered a lesson in Truth. When a man’s voice comes by the inspiration of his own intellect, it emits the cold rays of death. Truth is simple. Seek God in simplicity and with sincerity of heart.
The Lord held a little child in his arms, when He declared, “of such is the kingdom of Heaven.”
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. Mat 11:25
O my God! keep me ever in the number of those babes to whom Thou revealest thy mysteries, while Thou concealest them from the wise and prudent.
One Will
One God
One Truth
I think (maybe??) you missed my point Aaron… ? ? ?
Of course we see things the way we do because that’s what makes best sense to us. How could it be otherwise?? Of course I belief the one who sees it differently than I do is mistaken; again, how could it be otherwise??
And how on earth are we to measure this thing you call “certainty”?? Do we mean something like “there is NO chance I am wrong about this?”
Or, maybe, “at this time, given all that I’ve read and heard, this is what makes the best sense to me.”
But when one says stuff like –
Oh, how we so love the comfort of the traditions of men. The doctrine of the “Trinity” is surely one of the great hoodwink hallmarks of those very traditions. How long has the organized church packaged and stamped the falsity of the “Trinity”?
Read it! Attack it! Give it your best shot traditionalists and church goers and keep it short (Pratt) lol –
that one seems to assert that somehow he is immune from the struggle to know truth and has some kind of direct hotline whereby all of his understandings are to be normative for everyone! If there really is no distinction here, then we have an enormous disconnect it seems.
Besides, it’s laughably not true that we here are “traditionalists” – for last time I checked, UR is anything BUT “traditional” in the Christian realm right now… (Can you remind me, John, where you stand on Universal Reconciliation?)
And let me say this about that unfortunate phrase; “the traditions of men”… I’ve never met Christians so willing to use that notion against each other!! as I have here. When one stoops to use it against a brother in Christ, he is explicitly saying that His connection with God is superior. Which to my mind anyway is a most egregious violation of the third commandment; ascribing as from God his own agenda…
When one reads the bible as saying X, then looks down his nose at any who don’t see it that way (which is exactly how John presents his exalted vision) anything he says becomes simply unfalsifiable! After all, his interpretations trumps all others! Not only for himself, but for us too! (Aaron37 had this character trait as well)
Sorry – but the task of discerning truth is one God has given ME to do for MYSELF. And he gives that same task to everyone. Our human disagreements are not only to be expected, I think we should learn to embrace them…
Hope you see the difference Aaron.
TotalVictory
Bobx3
Just cutting through the BS, but I’m happy to serve as your scapegoat also
The Theologian’s of Jesus day loved compexity for it just meant more hoops, for God’s children to jump through. It’s been the same for two thousand years. Tradition upon tradtion the church binds it’s people.
I’ve always said “UR” is but a gateway truth that gives us an eye into the whole can of worms the organized church has sold God’s children. Yes, the complex Trinity doctrine is part of the can, that must be discarded.
I find the non-trinitarian explanation of Christ to be MUCH more complex and confusing. Ask them how Christ saved them and the fun begins with them at the center. They’re not quite as incredible as Christ but close…so who needs that bad ol church telling them they’re not?
‘Why do the heathen rage?’ It’s the same old question.
Aaron, I agree that the combination of divine simplicity and the incarnation is a difficult subject. A lot has been written about that since the Ancient Church. And you’ve reminded me that I’ve yet to write about it myself, which I need to do one of these days.
I’ll need to get back another day to do justice to this topic. For now, I’ll briefly say that one of the main points is that the divinity of the Son never changed because of the incarnation. And this is possible because humans are made in the image of God while Jesus is the only human who never fell from grace.
a simple soul just said it so clearly in a Facebook message, I read a moment ago. She wrote:
“Historically, religion has taught exactly the opposite of “I and the Father are ONE”–and that includes Christianity.”
My messages are being censored and I’m supposed to read the rule book after I explain the meaning of “BS”. Six personal messages from the moderators and I’ve hardly been here a day. 
bless you guys, it’s church all over again and I’m about to get churched
I’m a Lutheran - I am highly ‘churched’ - I love the liturgy and the history of not just my church but THE church from which we draw our liturgy and service - the communion of saints.
You’re a renegade and proud of it. **Moderator Deletion: RanRan, your getting too personal and unfriendly. This goes against the board rules and needs to stop, regardless if it’s against others that get edited by moderators.
**
Deleted by Moderation: Personal fights cannot remain on this board. Respectful opposition to the doctrine of the trinity and any other Christian doctrine is okay, except of course “civility”. That’s one doctrine insisted upon here.
Moderator Deletion
Moderator Deletion
Well, I got “immutability” (unchangeable) mixed up with “simplicity” (indivisibility), which have some similarities. Anyway, a lot has been written about the immutability of God and the incarnation since the Ancient Church. One of the main points is that the divinity of the Son never changed because of the incarnation. And this is possible because humans are made in the image of God while Jesus is the only human who never fell from grace.
I also want to clarify that I don’t believe in strong divine simplicity, which says that there is [no] difference between omnipotence and omniscience, and so on. I hold that the attributes of God are not all the same while they cannot be divided.
I do see the difference, and I’m sorry that I (sort of) missed your point!