photo #7729718

WHY ARGUING ABOUT THE TRINITY IS USELESS Most arguments that I've heard or read about the Trinity involve a brother using his choice verses while conveniently ignoring the choice verses of his opponent. The fact that more brethren do not see the pettiness and childishness of this is very troubling. If you want to teach that Jesus is the Father, then use Isaiah 9:6, I John 5:7 and John 10:30. If you want to teach that He isn't, then use Matthew 27:46 and John 17:1-5. If you want to teach that Jesus was begotten at His birth, then use Hebrews 1:5-6. If you want to teach that He was begotten at his resurrection, then use Acts 13:33. If you want to teach that He was begotten in eternity, then ignore both of those references and use Psalm 2:7 alone and pretend that eternity is the context. If you want to baptize in the name of Jesus, then ignore Matthew 28 and use the book of Acts only while pretending that the "name of Jesus" is all three, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. If you want to stick strictly to the Mattthew 28 great commission, then play the "D" card and say that Acts deals mostly with the gospel to Israel so being baptized in Jesus' name was a dispensational thing for Israel only. The point is that IT NEVER ENDS! The simple fact is that no one fully understands the Trinity doctrine, just as no one understands "where God came from" or "how He's just always been there." We can understand it and explain it to a point, but then we'll stop, if we're wise. When we keep going, it usually ends up with my verses against his verses, etc. Silly game that I'd rather not play. I'll just try to remain humble enough to say that my understanding of the Trinity is good enough, but LIMITED. But that's okay, because my faith in what God said about it is NOT limited.