The Trinity: A False Doctrine

"the Trinitarian god is either three gods, or one schizophrenic God." Wrong. Are you saying that God does not have the power to do as He chooses? Are you saying that God is bound to only one person because being three in one is "illogical"? How disrespectful! I don't know about you, but the God I worship had NO BARRIERS AT ALL. God is not bound by logic. If He was, He would not be God. "I have already demonstrated that Jesus was NOT referring to three separate persons" If you have not studied the language it was written in, then you are grasping at straws again. The language indicates that there were there seperate names for three separate beings. The way people were/are baptized does not mean much. (http://www.contenderministries.org...) "All of your points leave out the fact that Jesus was both a man, and God." Tell me, why should I not take this verse at face value? Jesus says that HE testifies for Himself, and thast the FATHER testifies for Him. You simply READ INTO IT that Jesus as man and Jesus as God are acting separately. The fact of the matter is, Jesus was fully masn and fully God, but the two were coexistent in one body. They acted as one. Jesus did not come and live a double life in a manner of speaking, but Jesus came down and inhabited the body of a man to accomplish the will of the Father. It was one being, not two. "Do you realize that if three beings are completely united as one, then they are one being, not three beings? It's impossible to be completely distinct and completely united at the same time." Think of it like this. Trinitarians believe that ONE entity (God) is comprised of three beings. Saying this is no more illogical than saything that one shape, namely a triangle, is comprised of three angles. Man is a being of one self consciousness, while God is a being of THREE self consciousnesses; being the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each having different names, and each having different roles. In a triangle, there are not three separate TRIANGLES, but three separate ANGLES. In saying "the Father is God", or "the Son is God", you must notice that the "is" is not an "is" of identity. This is an "is" of PREDICATION. If I say "my eyes are blue", I am not saying that my eyes are a COLOR, but rather that they have the PROPERTY of being blue. It is the same with God and His three persons. When we say the Father IS God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, we are saying that they are all DIVINE, or that they all share the attributes of diety. It is not like saying "Joe is Bill". That is an "is" of identity. Take for example the two following premises. 1)The Father is God. 2)The Son is God. 3)The Father is not the Son. If the "is" is an "is" of identity, then this is a logical contradiction. Take into consideration the next premise. 1)Ice is H2O 2)Liquid water is H2O 3)Ice is not liquid water In this case the "is" is an "is" of predication, and is not logically contradictory at all. This argument is (unfortunately) not my own. This is a paraphrase of the arguments made by William Lane Craig. You can find a very plausible and logically sound argument for the Trinity Doctrine, along with the argument I just posted in this video. (http://youtube.com...) "The pillar of cloud is not the pillar of fire, but are they, too, separate persons within the godhead?" This makes no sense at all. God was simply IN the pillar of fire/cloud. The pillar itself was not God. Besides, this would be an "is" of identity. 1)The pillar of fire is God. 2)The pillar of cloud is God. 3)The pillar of fire is not the pillar of cloud. Logically not sound, because it is an "is" of identity. "Once again, Jesus is not referring to himself, Jesus the man is referring to God." This is an HUGE misconception of Jesus. When Jesus came as a man, He did not come an invade the body of an already existing and conscious human being. There was not the consciousness of a man in the mix. This was only a consciousness of God manifested in flesh and blood. Saying that Jesus the man and Jesus the God were doing two diferent thing is ridiculous, because when God came to earth in the form of man, it was in one of the three consciousnesses of God. The only consciousness in that body was the consciousness of God. "He was both fully God and fully man. In the incarnation these two natures came together in a union which demands that we speak of Christ as one person. We cannot split up His two natures and say that as God He did this, and as man He did that. Everything that Jesus did, He did so as God manifest in the flesh. He slept as God manifest in the flesh. He healed as God manifest in the flesh. When considering Jesus' ministry, then, we must take into account the genuineness of His humanity." (http://www.apostolic.net...) "Why, if Jesus WAS the Lord of the Harvest, would he tell his disciples to pray to the Lord of the Harvest?" It's simple. We are to pray to God the Father, through Jesus Christ, who is the mediator. We pray with the help of the Holy Spirit, who "makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered". "this verse seems to indicate that the Holy Spirit is subservient to the Son. How exactly do you reconcile that to your doctrine?" SEEMS is the key word there. I am not exactly sure what to say to you, but let me put it to you this way. Acts 5:3-4 tells us in plain terns that, when lying to the Holy Spirit, Ananias and Saphira lied to God. This is not reasonably debatable. John 15:26 says nothing plainly concerning the Spirit's equality, and therefore I think thats, once again, you are grasping at straws. "If Jesus and the Holy Spirit are separate persons in the godhead, why would that be the case?" I am sorry, I miss spoke. Jesus is not saything that He MUST go in order for the Spirit to come, because this would be putting a barrier on God. Rather He is saying that the Spirit will not come unless the Son leaves. I am no expert, but my take on it is this: The Son leaves to be the mediator between God the Father and man, and the Spirit comes to make intercession for us. Once again, I am no expert. This is simply my take on it. If you want a complete and logical defense of the Trinity, visit William Lane Craig's website, at www.reasonablefaith.org. "Exactly where in scripture can I find a verse that, first of all, asserts that there are separate persons within the godhead, let alone three, and furthermore that "God the Son" and "God the Holy Ghost" are two of them?" You need to EXTENSIVELY study greek, and you will find what you are looking for. If you look at the video link I gave you, you will find an example of his starting at 4:24 and ending at 6:36. "The phrase "God the Father" is throughout the new testament. However, the phrases "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" do not." This is insignificant. In the story of Ananias and Saphira the Holy Spirit is openly called god, and in 1 John we see clearly that the Son is God. "If the Holy Spirit is God, then God does things according to the will of God." Go to the comment section to see my response. "this is not the only time God refers to Himself in this way." Doesn't matter. It is still far to uncommon and ridiculous of an argument. "If grammatical attribution of gender makes something a person, then wisdom, too, is a person" "And the Word became flesh..." The Bible was not, and is not flesh. How do you explain that one? We are debating whether or not God is triune, not why we would need the other persons. "Then why do you continue to refer to "God the Father" "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" if it is not necessary to differentiate?" This is explained above. Although I found you arguments very impressive, I'm afraid you have a long way to go before you disprove the Trinity.