The Only Problem With The Trinity
- Thread starter MatthewG
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
This is the definition I use:
explicit
[ikˈsplisit]
ADJECTIVE
- stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.
You reject explicit because it doesn't fit your dogma.
And you so narrowly define why John wrote things as to exclude anything that does not explicitly say Jesus is Messiah (which in the Jewish mind makes Him God BTW)
No deluded one: John 1:1 is a simple statement of fact that the Word was with god and th eWord was god and then John defines who the Word is. He became flesh and dwelt among us.
You cannot see the forest for the trees
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
The exact opposite is true!
What you are calling explicit is the ultimate example of figurative. Jesus is not even mentioned in the verse you site.
That is how you know the verse is NOT explicitly saying something about Jesus. But you reject explicit because it doesn't fit your dogma.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
It is the proper interpretation of the Gospel of John that everything he wrote was to say Jesus is the Messiah - and, therefore, nothing else. 20:31 makes this interpretation explicit.
(Not narrow but explicit interpretation from explicit text.)
The assertion that the Jewish mind equates the Messiah with God is laughable as the Jews are monotheists who hold, as I and Scripture do, that God is Spirit - and not flesh.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
The trinity is nowhere in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine. And you call me delusional. LOL
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
We asre done. You strain at gnats to swallow camels. Jesus is mentioned in John 1. the bible defines who the Word is and if you cannot accept this- there is no further point trying to have an intelligent conversation with you. bye! Have the last word if you wish.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Jesus is obviously NOT mentioned in John 1:1. I know how desperate you must be to assert this obvious falsehood.
As far as the Bible "defining" who the Word is. Again, words are WHAT's not WHO's. And John 1:1 explicitly says the word was with God. This is how you know the word is not a WHO, or "the WHO" who is God. All prophets, including Jesus, speak the word of God.
I know too that you want to pretend the trinity reduces to recognizing the man-is-God thesis, overlooking the non-existent "3rd person" of the trinity. Has ever Epistle explicitly informs us, there are only 2 beings: one is the Father, who alone is God; and the other is his (adopted) son. We are also children of God, just like Jesus. We are son's and daughters of God.
Let me guess. You will make another appeal to dualism. That one son is not on the same level in relationship to God the Father as other sons ...
the church is the new heaven and earth and new Jerusalem
Holy mother church
New creation
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Hello everyone...I'm new here and as this is one of my favourite topics, I will have to agree with Wrangler here.....
Even the Roman Catholic church admits that the trinity is not Biblical....IOW there is no way to prove the trinity scripturally. In fact, until the end of the fourth century, there was no trinity as official doctrine in Catholicism.
John 1:1 in Greek tells the story IMO....this is a word for word translation....
"In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros · ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos." (Mounce Interlinear)
In the Greek language there is only one word for any "god" (theos) and it is used for all the "gods" in Greek scripture, including satan....so calling Jesus "theos" did not mean that he was Almighty God, it simply meant that he was god-like, the same as their gods...'a divine mighty one'.
But the polytheistic Greeks had no word for the singular, (then nameless) God of the Jews. Every one of their gods were called by name, and were just collectively called "the gods". So they had to identify this singular God with no name by the use of the definite article (the, ho).....in scripture this is "ho theos". If you look carefully at the Greek rendering above, you will see the definite article used for the first mention of "ho theos" but not for the second. Without the definite article in the second instance in this sentence, the first God is Yahweh (THE God) and the second "god" is "the Word". The Jews had long ceased uttering the divine name, so there was no other way to single him out. Even in English we do this....at a gathering someone might say Brad Pitt was invited...and you ask...not THE Brad Pitt?
So it was "the Word" who "became flesh"...not THE God. (ho theos) And we also have to ask..."in the beginning of what"?...since the eternal God had no beginning, how was the Word "in the beginning with God"....if he was God?
The Word, (Logos or spokesman....who was the spirit being who became the man, Jesus Christ) did have a beginning. (Revelation 3:14; Colossians 1:15)
Now go to John 1:18 and see something else that is interesting....
"No one has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him." (NASB)
Now to translate this verse from the Greek required a bit of smoke and mirrors. It plainly states that "no man has ever seen God" and yet thousands saw Jesus. But that is not all....
"No one oudeis has horaō ever pōpote seen horaō God theos. The only monogenēs Son , himself God theos, the ho one who is eimi in eis the ho bosom kolpos of the ho Father patēr, he ekeinos has made him known exēgeomai." (Mounce Interlinear)
If you can see the Greek to English there you will see that the translators have not rendered this verse correctly. Words are inserted that do not belong unless someone is trying to suggest a trinity. "Monogenes" is literally an "only begotten" child, but "monogenes theos" means "only begotten god".....no wonder the translators had to pull a swifty here.....if Jesus was God then he cannot be "begotten" because the eternal God had no begetter. In order for the son to be from the Father, the Father had to exist first in order to beget his firstborn son.
This is not rocket science, but a blatant attempt to portray Jesus as something we wasn't, and never once claimed to be.
More often than not God and his Christ are mentioned but the holy spirit is not.
John 17:3...
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." (NASB)
So knowing God and his son are required for eternal life....but not the holy spirit....if he is an equal part of the trinity, where is mention of him as a requirement for eternal life?
What about the apostles? Were they confused about who their God was?
1 Corinthians 8:5-6...
"For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is only one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him."
Who was their "one God"?...."The Father" and who was their one Lord? (Master)...."Jesus Christ".....no holy spirit mentioned here either.
So the holy spirit is not an equal third person, but is the manifestation of God's power in fulfilling his purpose.
He can give holy spirit in due measure as he did with Moses when he was carrying the weight of the nation on his shoulders. He took 'some' of the spirit that was on Moses and gave it to his appointed assistants. (Numbers 11:16-17)
Jesus Christ himself was just a mortal man until God gave him holy spirit at his baptism. There is no record of Jesus being able to perform miracles before that time.
So all in all...I can't see the trinity as a valid Bible teaching....in actual fact it is blasphemous, placing another "god" in place of the Father, which breaks the First Commandment. (Exodus 20:3)
Even the Roman Catholic church admits that the trinity is not Biblical....IOW there is no way to prove the trinity scripturally. In fact, until the end of the fourth century, there was no trinity as official doctrine in Catholicism.
John 1:1 in Greek tells the story IMO....this is a word for word translation....
"In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros · ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos." (Mounce Interlinear)
In the Greek language there is only one word for any "god" (theos) and it is used for all the "gods" in Greek scripture, including satan....so calling Jesus "theos" did not mean that he was Almighty God, it simply meant that he was god-like, the same as their gods...'a divine mighty one'.
But the polytheistic Greeks had no word for the singular, (then nameless) God of the Jews. Every one of their gods were called by name, and were just collectively called "the gods". So they had to identify this singular God with no name by the use of the definite article (the, ho).....in scripture this is "ho theos". If you look carefully at the Greek rendering above, you will see the definite article used for the first mention of "ho theos" but not for the second. Without the definite article in the second instance in this sentence, the first God is Yahweh (THE God) and the second "god" is "the Word". The Jews had long ceased uttering the divine name, so there was no other way to single him out. Even in English we do this....at a gathering someone might say Brad Pitt was invited...and you ask...not THE Brad Pitt?
So it was "the Word" who "became flesh"...not THE God. (ho theos) And we also have to ask..."in the beginning of what"?...since the eternal God had no beginning, how was the Word "in the beginning with God"....if he was God?
The Word, (Logos or spokesman....who was the spirit being who became the man, Jesus Christ) did have a beginning. (Revelation 3:14; Colossians 1:15)
Now go to John 1:18 and see something else that is interesting....
"No one has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him." (NASB)
Now to translate this verse from the Greek required a bit of smoke and mirrors. It plainly states that "no man has ever seen God" and yet thousands saw Jesus. But that is not all....
"No one oudeis has horaō ever pōpote seen horaō God theos. The only monogenēs Son , himself God theos, the ho one who is eimi in eis the ho bosom kolpos of the ho Father patēr, he ekeinos has made him known exēgeomai." (Mounce Interlinear)
If you can see the Greek to English there you will see that the translators have not rendered this verse correctly. Words are inserted that do not belong unless someone is trying to suggest a trinity. "Monogenes" is literally an "only begotten" child, but "monogenes theos" means "only begotten god".....no wonder the translators had to pull a swifty here.....if Jesus was God then he cannot be "begotten" because the eternal God had no begetter. In order for the son to be from the Father, the Father had to exist first in order to beget his firstborn son.
This is not rocket science, but a blatant attempt to portray Jesus as something we wasn't, and never once claimed to be.
More often than not God and his Christ are mentioned but the holy spirit is not.
John 17:3...
"And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." (NASB)
So knowing God and his son are required for eternal life....but not the holy spirit....if he is an equal part of the trinity, where is mention of him as a requirement for eternal life?
What about the apostles? Were they confused about who their God was?
1 Corinthians 8:5-6...
"For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is only one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him."
Who was their "one God"?...."The Father" and who was their one Lord? (Master)...."Jesus Christ".....no holy spirit mentioned here either.
So the holy spirit is not an equal third person, but is the manifestation of God's power in fulfilling his purpose.
He can give holy spirit in due measure as he did with Moses when he was carrying the weight of the nation on his shoulders. He took 'some' of the spirit that was on Moses and gave it to his appointed assistants. (Numbers 11:16-17)
Jesus Christ himself was just a mortal man until God gave him holy spirit at his baptism. There is no record of Jesus being able to perform miracles before that time.
So all in all...I can't see the trinity as a valid Bible teaching....in actual fact it is blasphemous, placing another "god" in place of the Father, which breaks the First Commandment. (Exodus 20:3)
hi Jane welcome
is Jesus eternal?
what you said about no trinity until the 4 century is not true, it may have not been defined but thee faith in its entirety is handed from Christ to his church to the apostles eph 4:5 Jude 1:3
aka the sacred deposit of thee faith of Christians
FYI: the divinity of Christ and the blessed trinity are Christian doctrines so to deny them shows that you are not a Christian!
Thanks
Father, Son and Holy Spirit - God in Three Persons - are deeply present in the New Testament
John's Gospel, esp. ch.s 13 - 17; Romans 8; John's First Epistle, etc.
John's Gospel, esp. ch.s 13 - 17; Romans 8; John's First Epistle, etc.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Thank you.
Since “eternal” means without beginning or end, I will have to answer no. The only eternal Being in existence is the Father, the Creator of all things, and the Begetter of of his firstborn son. Is Jesus now immortal? Yes, I believe that he was rewarded for his faithful course. That simply means that he cannot die, not that he ever was “eternal”.
It is God himself who identifies the relationship of Father and Son. The being who became Jesus Christ was a “son of God” before his human birth. If they were equal parts of a triune godhead, then why depict themselves this way? The Father has a personal name (YHWH, Yahweh or Jehovah) and the Son also has a personal name (Jesus) but the holy spirit does not have a personal name because it is not a person. It is God’s spirit in that it emanates from him as the power he uses to accomplish his will.
OK.....at Eph 4:1-6 the apostle Paul says....
“Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, being diligent to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you also were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.” (NASB)
I like to see verses in context. The “one body and one spirit” is expressing the unity of the body of Christ’s disciples. Their “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” meant that all adhered to the same teachings. But their “one God and Father” was not Jesus Christ.
Jude 1:3 was an admonition for the disciples to “put up a hard fight for the faith” that was “delivered to the Holy Ones”. Why was there need to “put up a hard fight”? Because dark forces were against them both from outside and also within, they needed to stay on track and not be deterred or overreached by those forces.
We know from history however, that they did not fight hard enough, and true to the apostles’ words, the corruption from within was what took the biggest toll on the Christian Faith. What had happened to the Jewish faith, would also happen to the Christian faith, (because they had the same enemy) men would teach “commands of men as doctrines”, making their faith “in vain”. (Matthew 15:7-9; 2 Peter 2:1-3; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; Acts 20:30)
The teachings that Jesus left for his followers were going to be replaced by the “weeds” sown by the devil. (Matthew 13:24-30) What became known as “Christianity” by the world from the second century onward, was a steady decline into outright apostasy. The “wheat and the weeds” would grow together in the world right up until the end times. And people would have to make a choice between them. Jesus indicated that the majority would choose the wrong path, for the wrong reasons. (Matthew 7:13-14) How can anyone excuse the despicable history of the Roman Catholic Church?
On investigation, I could find precious little of what Jesus taught, in the Catholic Faith. But if it’s been ingrained since childhood, being taught blind obedience to the church, how would anyone know how far they had strayed off the path?
The truth is there for anyone who really wants to know.
On the contrary, I believe that making Jesus into something he never was, and never claimed to be, is what disqualifies one from being a Christian.
John 17:1-5.....
“Jesus spoke these things; and raising His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, so that the Son may glorify You, 2 just as You gave Him authority over all mankind, so that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4 I glorified You on the earth by accomplishing the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now You, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world existed.” (NASB)
All things come from the Father to the son....so where is the equality? God gave his son a commission and also gave him authority to carry it out because the son is not God. He is a servant of his Father. (Acts 3:13-15)
So, the scriptures tell a very different story to the RC church......
Nowhere in the Bible will you find any of the following as teachings for Christians....
A trinity.
The veneration of Mary, who was never called the “mother of God”.
The offering of prayers to Mary or the saints as intercessors.
The use of images in worship.
Infant baptism.
A hellfire of eternal torment.
Immortality of the human soul.
Purgatory.
Indulgences.
An earthly priesthood with identifying garb.
A Pope as head of the church.
Liturgy.
Repetitive prayers.
Holy water.
Offering of incense.
The celebration of disguised pagan festivals.....
If you would like to start a thread to explore these things I will be more than happy to discuss them with you, just using the Bible.
I can see that you are very sincere, but I believe that the power of the church, exercised even over world rulers for many centuries, has virtually destroyed the Christian Faith with its false teachings. Christendom is the result....hopelessly fractured and eternally bickering over who is right. That is not the Christian Faith that Jesus taught. (1 Cor 1:10)
The “fruitage” of the church has identified it, not as a work of Christ, but of his enemy.
Christendom’s hands are filled with blood...always eager to support the wars of their nations even if it meant killing their own “brothers” in the faith. (Isaiah 1:15; 1 John 4:20-21)
There is a bigger picture....if you want to see it.
- Status
Similar threads
