First of all thank you for your thoughts.
Let me explain a little bit of my background too...I was never a member of Worldwide Church of God and from what I hear, I'm glad I wasn't. There certainly seemed to be a structure or organization there that to many resulted in abusive behavior. There also seemed to be a cultic aspect to the structure and organization for many. Another problem I saw was that because of the hierarchical system in place many opinions or speculations often became synonymous with doctrine. Ultimately these are the reasons why World Wide Church of God ultimately fell.
So I can completely understand the animosity of many people on these threads towards me. But at the same time there was a solid foundation of biblical teaching within that group.
I belong to United because they kept the sound biblical doctrine and jettisoned the speculation and hierarchical system.
Now on to the trinity. Number one, despite the protests on this thread and other threads it's clear that it's a late addition to Christianity. That alone should make it suspect...it's non-biblical in origin.
But the biggest thing (and this is going to for sure be twisted because it's going to be difficult to give it the justice needed in a few words) the biggest thing is that it completely alters the concept of our relationship with the our father and with our elder brother Jesus Christ.
How? We know that things on earth are often shadows of the heavenly. God created and designed us to have families. Man and women get married and have kids. Go forth and multiply.
We know that Christ often used the analogy of the church being his bride. The purpose of this union is to produce children, children of God. Heirs and joint heirs with Christ. We, the children of God, will be of the same substance as God. This is borne out in scripture (1 John 3:2). We will be in a loving relationship and heirs of all things. Again all scriptural. What the trinity concept does is that it puts the future children of God "outside" of this family relationship. If we think of the Godhead as a family, then it's clear that God's children will part of that family...part of the Godhead. With the closed trinity system and the false addition of the "holy spirit" to a family it closes it off. It takes it from a personal, reigning, royal family, to an amorphous blob with no relation to family or love.
This makes it much more difficult for believe in and love the Lord with all our heart soul and mind and to love each other as ourselves.
I know this was inadequate but hopefully I got the main points across.]
Ah, well my experience was no other consideration was given to anyone who did not adhere to the doctrine. Abusive is a good description as to the 'church' teaching, mainly because the flesh beings decided what Scripture was taught and the rest was categorically dismissed and ignored. To question automatically caused an intervention for allowing the devil to tempt ones mind. Anyway I could write a book, but that would not really serve any purpose.
Our Heavenly Father had Isaiah pen (Isaiah 7:14) that a virgin would conceive. Yes, I am aware some reject this prophecy and claim the Scripture is not speaking of Christ the promise. But hey each to their own. This promised only Begotten Son was to be called Immanuel, which means 'God with us'. This was a sign, there are many signs planted all through the Old Testament, which Paul says were Written for our warning as to what would be again to end this flesh age. (I Corinthians 10:11) And we are indeed repeating that same activities as was Written down all those many years ago.
I do not dispute the idea of the Heavenly Father as Head of His family. Now, until 'judgment day' we have opportunity to spent eternity with Him, as His loving children. At present there is only one named entity, the devil and a numbered of his followers that have been already judged to death. None of this bunch have opportunity to pass through this flesh age, born of woman. John 3... To be born of woman is the first requirement to 'see' the kingdom of God. This begs the question when were all souls created. They certainly already existed back in the garden of Eden as the Adam was not alive until the breath of life which means soul was breathed into the Adam's nostrils.
All souls were created by and belong to the Heavenly Father all churches notwithstanding. (Ezekiel 18:4) Our scientific community readily admits they are not able to discern, test, or model the spirit body. Paul says there are some souls that return to the Maker that sent them already judged as over-comers, say like Noah, Abraham and an unnumbered mass. I believe all souls were created at the same time and when this flesh body returns to the dust from which it comes that soul all of them returns to the Maker.
Now as far as Christ being our brother, I do not and cannot consider Him, as God with us in a flesh body as a brother... He is our kinsman redeemer, and no other entity either in spiritual or flesh form can or will replace Him. He is the 'tree of life' spoken of in Genesis and in Revelation... there is none other like Him.
Once the last willing soul begins their flesh journey this flesh age is done. And no I have no idea how many or when the last soul will begin their journey at conception. Only The Heavenly Father knows that.
I do not have animosity toward you. That might be the impression some take when their traditions get rebuffed for getting in the way of having the meat of the Word served.
I can remember as if it were yesterday where I was and what I was doing when my own flesh father told me we would not be going back to 'the church'. I know first hand what it is to be deceived into another person's traditions. As in anything all was not lost because at least I was required to study as much of the Old Testament as the New.
I was greatly disappointed to discover that after all my youth being told the Bible says this earth is only around six thousand years old to find that is not what the Bible in any hint, direct or indirectly states. So as I take this flesh journey I am wary of flesh when it comes to their old or young traditions that make the WORD of God null and void.
#1: The Trinity is taught in the New Testament (written all in that first century);
#2: The early church fathers taught it in the first, second, third, etc. centuries.
#3: Just because some of the 4th century councils addressed the Trinity in response to heresies that cropped up doesn't = "add-on" doctrine.
I mean, what I said above about the Trinity could be also said about the canonization of the Bible:
#1: The inspiration of NT content is taught in the New Testament (written all in that first century);
#2: The early church fathers taught that various NT gospels & epistles were inspired in the first, second, third, etc. centuries.
#3: Just because a 4th century council addressed the Biblical canon in response to competing claims of other works doesn't = these books were suddenly -- and with a degree of so-called tardiness -- recognized as having been inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Those who make these claims haven't studied the NT well enough; what the early church fathers wrote about both the Trinity and the Bible; etc.
Both are parallel considerations...and anybody making the claim that the Trinity is a late "add-on" is likewise making a claim that most Christian teachings and the Bible itself is a late "add-on" as well.