Trinitarian misunderstandings leads Lutheran minister to claim God is non-binary, uses plural pronouns, and that Jesus had two fathers
“I believe in a non-binary God whose pronouns are plural.” pic.twitter.com/9yknZi3sJ7
— Catch Up (@CatchUpFeed) June 27, 2023
Trinitarians claim that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit make up the Godhead and are co-equal members of it.
Well, a female Lutheran minister has taken that and perverted it even further as World Net Daily reports:
Allegedly ‘Christian’ church: God is ‘non-binary whose pronouns are plural’
June 27, 2023 at 4:36pm
A Lutheran church in Minnesota recited a “sparkle creed” about the “nonbinary God” and Jesus’ “two dads” during its Sunday service, according to a live stream recording on YouTube.
Edina Community Lutheran Church Pastor Anna Helgen asked the congregation to stand in “body or spirit” to “confess our faith” in the “sparkle creed,” according to the recording. The church went on to chant a statement of faith in the “nonbinary God” and in Jesus Christ, “who had two dads.” …
The church also prayed for the upcoming Pride festival, for “all LGBTQIA+ leaders” and for those who have felt excluded due to their “gender, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin or any other human distinction.” https://www.wnd.com/2023/06/allegedly-christian-church-god-non-binary-whose-pronouns-plural/
Let’s deal with each of these.
First, Jesus, who is God, taught that God made two genders:
4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
Notice that God made humans male and female–this is binary. And God did this for marriage (see also God Created Marriage). The human body is “not for fornication” (1 Corinthians 6:13, KJV), nor for homosexual relations (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; see also The Bible Condemns Homosexuality).
Let me also insert that trying to claim the LGBTQ+ agenda is compatible with the Bible is wrong. Many consider that scripture is to be subservient to the LGBTQ+ agenda as the following report shows:
U.N. “expert,” Victor Madrigal-Borloz, commented to the 53rd Session of the U.N. Human Rights Council his opinion that religious freedom isn’t “incompatible” with LGBT equality.
And that’s to be accomplished through making “long-held religious beliefs and traditions … subservient.” …
He said the fix is to have religious communities re-interpret their own doctrines to meet his preferences. …
Explained the Stand, “So, now if we hold to biblical truth, we are apparently just misinterpreting our own doctrines. He insinuates that religious believers who do not embrace the LGBT ideology are misinterpreting their own religion. It is the height of arrogance for a U.N. expert to suggest that his interpretation — informed by the LGBT activist groups who submitted comments for his report — understands the teachings of major world religions better than their own religious leaders or the thousands of years of tradition that often inform their beliefs.”
The report, by Arielle Del Turco, noted that Borloz also cited concern about those people who are interpreting religious doctrines that place homosexuality “within a discourse of immorality and sin.”
He suggested such comments about LGBT lifestyles and sin “can be considered hate speech or even incitement to violence.”
Borgot lashed out as nations, like Hungary, have banned same-sex duos from adopting children. 06/27/23 https://www.wnd.com/2023/06/u-n-expert-demands-religious-beliefs-changed-accommodate-lgbt/
So, another call to basically ban people from saying what the Bible teaches. Many want to ban at least parts of the Bible (watch: American Banning of the Bible).
That said, second, it is wrong to say that God’s pronouns are non-binary. In regards to God the Father (male pronouns used throughout scripture) and Jesus the Son (male pronouns used throughout scripture) singular masculine pronouns are what is supported by the original text.
That said, the word for spirit in Hebrew is feminine and in Greek is neuter. If the Holy Spirit were the third member of a true trinity, as trinitarians teach, then there might be some minor point to the Lutheran minister’s argument. However, since that is not true, some of their views are mute.
The historical reality is that the idea of the Holy Spirit being a member of the Godhead was not a belief of original Christians.
At least one trinitarian scholar has admitted:
The language of the New Testament permits the Holy Spirit to be understood as an impersonal force or influence more readily than it does the Son … The attempt to develop an understanding of the Holy Spirit consistent with the trinitarian passages … came to fruition at Constantinople in 381. There were a number of reasons why the personhood of the Holy Spirit took longer to acknowledge than the Son: (1) the term pneuma, breath, is neuter in general and impersonal in ordinary meaning; (2) the distinctive work of the Holy Spirit, influencing the believer, does not necessarily seem as personal as that of the Father … in addition, those who saw the Holy Spirit as a Person, were often heretical, for example, the Montanists; (3) many of the early theologians attributed to the Logos or Word, the revelatory activity later theologians saw as the special, personal work of the Holy Spirit (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, p. 140).
In other words, trinitarian scholars understand that:
1) a concept close to what is trinitarians teach about the Holy Spirit was not widely accepted until the fourth century,
2) normal understanding of koine Greek reveals that the Holy Spirit would be impersonal, not a person,
3) the work of the Holy Spirit can be attributed to an impersonal force from God,
4) second-century heretics were associated with treating the Holy Spirit as a person,
5) early church writers made statements contradicting the current trinitarian view of the Holy Spirit, and
6) after the trinity was accepted, later writers decided statements must support the trinity, hence essentially PROVING that the Holy Spirit as part of a divine trinity WAS NOT an original early Christian teaching.
Notice also :
Like other doctrines that became central to the faith, however, belief in the Trinity was a historical development, not a “given” from the early years of the faith. A. The basic notion of the Trinity is that there are three persons in the Godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These are all equally God and of the same substance, but despite the fact there are three persons, together, they compromise only one God, indivisible in nature. B. This doctrine does not appear to be a doctrine pronounced by the historical Jesus, Paul, or any other Christian writer during the first hundred years or so of Christianity. C. It cannot be found explicitly stated in the earliest Christian writings. The only passage of the New Testament that declares the doctrine (1 John 5:7-8) was not originally part of the text but was added by doctrinally astute scribes at a later date (it is not found in any Greek manuscripts until the 11th century) (Ehrman B. From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity, Part 2. The Teaching Company, Chantilly (VA), 2004, p. 43).
The above properly concludes that the trinity was not an original Christian belief and that the only passage in the New Testament that supposedly declares that doctrine (1 John 5:7-8) was added at a later date.
Third, if as trinitarians assert, the Father and Holy Spirit are equal members of the Godhead, then under that ‘logic’ Jesus has two fathers.
However, since the Holy Spirit is basically the power of God and proceeds from the Father and the Son, then no, Jesus did not have two fathers. The Father used the Holy Spirit.
Fourth, the New Testament also does not support females being ministers (see Women and the New Testament Church).
Now, fifth, what about God using plural pronouns?
The way the Lutheran minister used that is a misrepresentation of scripture.
As already mentioned, the pronouns for “father” and “son” are properly masculine–and those are what are normally used for God.
The Lutheran claim about God using plural pronouns is not based on most biblical references, but basically on a trinitarian misunderstanding of the word in Hebrew, Elohim.
Here is something from our free online book, Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism, on that :
Genesis 1 uses the Hebrew term transliterated as “Elohiym” for God, Elohim is a uniplural noun, like church, which means it is normally referring to more than one being (Biblesoft says Elohiym literally is the plural of the word God).
Trinitarians tend to claim that Elohim proves the trinity, but it does not. Elohim is, instead, consistent with the binitarian view of the Godhead.
That was the view of the original Christians as well as the view of the Continuing Church of God.
Here is the plural ‘pronounal’ part of Genesis 1:
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” (Genesis 1:26)
So God the Father and God the Word said “Let Us.” But that is not any different than two or more people saying “let us” in the pronounal sense. Scripture does not support the “non-binary,” plural pronoun usage for the Father or the Son.
Furthermore, although it is shocking to some, the early faithful clearly held what has been called a binitarian or semi-Arian view of the Godhead.
That said, no, God is not non-binary. The individual members of the Godhead do not identify by using plural pronouns, and Jesus did not have two fathers.
But, sadly who get a lot of their teachings from outside of scripture do not realize the truth about the Godhead.
Those interested in studying this doctrine in more detail, should consider looking at the following documented items:
Binitarianism: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning Were the original Christians binitarian? What does scripture and early writings reveal. A related sermon is also available: Binitarian view of the Godhead. Here is a sermon in Spanish: La Identidad de Dios es Binitaria.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Proof Jesus is the Messiah This free book has over 200 Hebrew prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus. Plus, His arrival was consistent with specific prophecies and even Jewish interpretations of prophecy. Here are links to seven related sermons: Proof Jesus is the Messiah, Prophecies of Jesus’ birth, timing, and death, Jesus’ prophesied divinity, 200+ OT prophecies Jesus filled; Plus prophecies He made, Why Don’t Jews Accept Jesus?, Daniel 9, Jews, and Jesus, and Facts and Atheists’ Delusions About Jesus. Plus the links to two sermonettes: Luke’s census: Any historical evidence? and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but … These videos cover nearly all of the book, plus have some information not in the book.
Is The Father God? What is the view of the Bible? What was the view of the early church?
Jesus: The Son of God and Saviour Who was Jesus? Why did He come to earth? What message did He bring? Is there evidence outside the Bible that He existed? Here is a YouTube sermon titled Jesus: Son of God and Saviour.
Jesus is God, But Became Flesh Was Jesus fully human and fully God or what? Here is information in the Spanish language¿Es Jesucristo Dios?
Did Early Christians Think the Holy Spirit Was A Separate Person in a Trinity? Or did they have a different view? A related sermon is available: Truth about the Holy Spirit: What THEY do not want you to know!
Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity? Most act like this is so, but is it? Here is an old, by somewhat related, article in the Spanish language LA DOCTRINA DE LA TRINIDAD. Two related sermons are available: Trinity: Fundamental to Christianity or Something Else? and The Godhead and the Trinity. A brief video is also available: Three trinitarian scriptures?
 |
Tweet |
|