Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,736
- 8,989
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Can One Be Christian and Not Believe In The Trinity?
- Thread starter GodsGrace
- 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
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,736
- 8,989
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
A man like Moses. See John 1:45, “We have found the very man Moses and the prophets wrote about!
Berean
Well-Known Member
- Feb 29, 2024
- 873
- 453
- 63
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
No, not really. Non-physical realities do not work like physical objects, it is obvious. 1 love + 1 love is not the same thing as 1 apple + 1 apple.
A car is on a specific physical place, a hope is not. Etc.
Last edited:
I did. I also read the Hebrews and other Scriptures. Do you accept the New Testament canon? It seems to me you do not.
This is "Christians only" section of the board, so Christian Scriptures have the highest theological authority, here.
Here is your scripture:
Deuteronomy 18:15-18
15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him.
16 "This is according to all that you asked of the LORD your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, 'Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.'
17 "The LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well.
18 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
Your verse states that God will raise up a Prophet.
Jesus was a Prophet....no problem here.
Jesus was
A PROPHET
A PRIEST
A KING
This is also accepted Christian theology.
Do you also disagree with this?
Then you posted
John 1:45
45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and also the Prophets wrote -Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."
I suppose this means, to you, that Jesus was referred to as a man.
Jesus was also referred to as a man in Acts 2:23 - no problem.
So let's keep reading:
John 1:49-51
49 Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."
50 Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these."
51 And He said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."
Please note that the same John that you are referencing is the same John that:
1. Stated the WORD was God and the WORD became flesh. John was speaking of Jesus. John 1:1, 14
2. In John 1:49-51 John, the same John that wrote John 1:45, is stating that Nathaneal called Jesus The Son of God.
Jesus saw N under the fig tree - Jesus was a Prophet.
3. Jesus Himself, states that N will see the angels ascending and descending on THE SON OF MAN.
This, of course, is referring to Daniel 7 and any Jewish person at the time would have known that Jesus was referring to Himself as the one coming in the clouds...IOW, God. "One like the Son of Man". And for this Jesus was called a blasphemer.
Matthew 26:64
We should read all of the bible,,,,not just the parts that SEEM to agree with what we think is correct.
Unique theism in that it tends not to believe in idol worship. But there is one God. One God who did and does what?
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Just reviewing this thread, I would like to address your assertions.....it is apparent that your interpretation of Scripture is coloured by your trinitarian bias.
What do those verses really say that their Jewish writers would have understood in the first century when the trinity doctrine did not exist? It is a later addition, not taught by Jesus or ever stated by his Father.
Misinterpretation and misapplication can make Scripture seem to say what it never did. The Bible was not written to imply a god that the Jews never knew. All of the first Christians were Jewish....so they understood everything Jesus and his apostles taught through a Jewish lens, not a Catholic one.
It is “God’s spirit”, so it is something belonging to God, coming from God....but is not God, or even a person. At best, you have two “gods” indicated in the Bible.....but that does not explain why others are referred to as “gods”, using the same word.
So a first consideration would be to define the word “theos” as it was understood back in Jesus’ day.
According to Strongs Concordance, the primary definition of “theos” is....
The Greeks had hundreds of gods, but they all had names and were referred to as such. The God of the Jews at that time, however, was nameless (because the Jewish leadership had decided that the divine name was too sacred to be uttered....so they referred Jehovah only as “the Lord” or “Adonai”. That was an act of disobedience, as God had told Moses in Exodus 3:15....
“And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” (ASV)
In the Jewish Tanakh, the divine name appears in the Hebrew text.
”Theos” is also used in the Bible....to...
In John 10:31-36 Jehovah himself calls his judges, “gods” (theos) because they represented him to the people.
Satan is called “theos” in 2 Cor 4:4....so it is obvious that, as the definition implies, it has a wide range of meanings.
There were no capital letters nor any punctuation in Greek...so unless the word “theos” was preceded by the definite article, (“ho”) context would determine which “theos” was the intended subject.
In John 1:1 there is “ho theos” referring to Jehovah and “theos” referring to the Word (“ho logos”) who is ‘God like or divine’ but not an equal deity with his God and Father.
When Jesus taught us “the Lord’s Prayer”...he said “Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name”....not “my name”. The loss of God’s name was the platform upon which the trinity was founded.
Had John 1:1 been correctly translated it would have read...
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Jehovah, and the Word was divine”. (or “God like”).
Something that is done “through” an agent or an agency is done in a representative way. Jesus was the “us “ and “our” in Gen 1:26. God created everything “through” the agency of his “firstborn” son. (Col 1:15-17) John 1:2-3 also says this...and indicates a “beginning”. If the Son was the “beginning of God’s creation” as it says in Rev 3:14, then Christendom has a dilemma.
In the Bible, reference to the “right hand” could be both symbolic and literal.
In co-regency, the son and heir of a king could share rulership with his father by sitting at his right hand. In effect sitting on his father’s throne. He was co-ruler but under the authority of his father, the King. Jesus is said to be a son, a king and an heir. (Luke 1:32-33; Heb 1:2) He cannot be his own heir. What is he inheriting that God doesn’t already have?
The Greek Word “pro·sky·neʹo” means to bow down as a mark of respect....a common practice in Bible times. It is used of the magi who came looking for the new “King of the Jews”...they bowed in respect to the new monarch, not to a new god.
To translate “pro·sky·neʹo” as worship should only be done with respect to Jehovah alone....never to a human....or to any other god.
This bowing in respect is all through the Bible....and it’s not worship. (Josh 5:13-15; Gen 18:1-2)
In Greek those verses could correctly read.....
“about the Son it says.....God is your throne forever and ever” and then the next part makes sense...the subject of the address has a God who anointed him for that position. God doesn’t anoint himself.
Jesus was going to be the “prophet like Moses” as Peter identifies in Acts 3:22....
“Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you.” (ESV) He was quoting Deut 18:15. (Acts 7:37)
So, not just a man....and not just a prophet....he was “God’s holy servant” (Acts 4:27, 30)
God has servants....he is not his own servant.
What do those verses really say that their Jewish writers would have understood in the first century when the trinity doctrine did not exist? It is a later addition, not taught by Jesus or ever stated by his Father.
Misinterpretation and misapplication can make Scripture seem to say what it never did. The Bible was not written to imply a god that the Jews never knew. All of the first Christians were Jewish....so they understood everything Jesus and his apostles taught through a Jewish lens, not a Catholic one.
The word “god” is “theos” in Greek. Both Father and Son are said to carry the title “theos” in the Bible, but so do others.....but nowhere in Scripture is the Holy Spirit said to be “theos”.
It is “God’s spirit”, so it is something belonging to God, coming from God....but is not God, or even a person. At best, you have two “gods” indicated in the Bible.....but that does not explain why others are referred to as “gods”, using the same word.
So a first consideration would be to define the word “theos” as it was understood back in Jesus’ day.
According to Strongs Concordance, the primary definition of “theos” is....
- “a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities.”
The Greeks had hundreds of gods, but they all had names and were referred to as such. The God of the Jews at that time, however, was nameless (because the Jewish leadership had decided that the divine name was too sacred to be uttered....so they referred Jehovah only as “the Lord” or “Adonai”. That was an act of disobedience, as God had told Moses in Exodus 3:15....
“And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” (ASV)
In the Jewish Tanakh, the divine name appears in the Hebrew text.
”Theos” is also used in the Bible....to...
- refers to the things of God
- his counsels, interests, things due to him
- whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
- God's representative or viceregent
- of magistrates and judges”
- God's representative or viceregent
In John 10:31-36 Jehovah himself calls his judges, “gods” (theos) because they represented him to the people.
Satan is called “theos” in 2 Cor 4:4....so it is obvious that, as the definition implies, it has a wide range of meanings.
There were no capital letters nor any punctuation in Greek...so unless the word “theos” was preceded by the definite article, (“ho”) context would determine which “theos” was the intended subject.
In John 1:1 there is “ho theos” referring to Jehovah and “theos” referring to the Word (“ho logos”) who is ‘God like or divine’ but not an equal deity with his God and Father.
When Jesus taught us “the Lord’s Prayer”...he said “Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name”....not “my name”. The loss of God’s name was the platform upon which the trinity was founded.
Had John 1:1 been correctly translated it would have read...
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Jehovah, and the Word was divine”. (or “God like”).
Do you see that word “through” there.....which indicates agency......
Something that is done “through” an agent or an agency is done in a representative way. Jesus was the “us “ and “our” in Gen 1:26. God created everything “through” the agency of his “firstborn” son. (Col 1:15-17) John 1:2-3 also says this...and indicates a “beginning”. If the Son was the “beginning of God’s creation” as it says in Rev 3:14, then Christendom has a dilemma.
Yes....’sitting at God’s right hand’, after he had provided the sacrifice that rescued the human race from sin and death, was foreshadowed in Psalm 110:1 where David’s “Lord” (Messiah) is told by his God Jehovah, to ‘sit at his right hand until he makes his enemies a stool for his feet’.
In the Bible, reference to the “right hand” could be both symbolic and literal.
In co-regency, the son and heir of a king could share rulership with his father by sitting at his right hand. In effect sitting on his father’s throne. He was co-ruler but under the authority of his father, the King. Jesus is said to be a son, a king and an heir. (Luke 1:32-33; Heb 1:2) He cannot be his own heir. What is he inheriting that God doesn’t already have?
This is not worship, but obeisance. No one worshipped Jesus, who was a man. That would have been unacceptable to a Jew....blasphemy in fact. Nowhere did the angels or the apostles “worship” the Son of God, but showed due respect to his superior position, as their angelic commander and as their human Messiah.
The Greek Word “pro·sky·neʹo” means to bow down as a mark of respect....a common practice in Bible times. It is used of the magi who came looking for the new “King of the Jews”...they bowed in respect to the new monarch, not to a new god.
To translate “pro·sky·neʹo” as worship should only be done with respect to Jehovah alone....never to a human....or to any other god.
This bowing in respect is all through the Bible....and it’s not worship. (Josh 5:13-15; Gen 18:1-2)
Again what you highlighted escapes your notice....it’s the phrasing that seems to imply what Christendom wants to believe....but it clearly says in the second highlighted sentence...”God, Your God, has anointed You.” Does God have a God? (Rev 3:12)
In Greek those verses could correctly read.....
“about the Son it says.....God is your throne forever and ever” and then the next part makes sense...the subject of the address has a God who anointed him for that position. God doesn’t anoint himself.
Yes ‘agency’ explains that. The Son is “the firstborn of ALL CREATION”....which makes him part of that creation. (Col 1:15-17) “all things were created through him and for him”.....creation came” through” the Son and was made “for him”. Think about that.
He was not just a man at all...he was the only sinless man born of a woman, which is the only way he could become our redeemer. He had to offer to God the set price of redemption....”a life for a life”, which in this case was “a sinless life for the sinless life” Adam took from his children. If he had been more that 100% human, his sacrifice would not have met the criteria and would have been invalid.
Jesus was going to be the “prophet like Moses” as Peter identifies in Acts 3:22....
“Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you.” (ESV) He was quoting Deut 18:15. (Acts 7:37)
So, not just a man....and not just a prophet....he was “God’s holy servant” (Acts 4:27, 30)
God has servants....he is not his own servant.
Big Boy Johnson
Well-Known Member
GRACE ambassador
Well-Known Member
Precious friend, I know What you mean, Especially in light of God's Precious Word Of Truth,
Which Has A Vast Multitude ( about 500! ) Plain And Clear Passages Showing The:
Complete Case FOR The Triune GodHead! - ie. #:
...58 God Shed His Own Precious BLOOD (Acts 20:28 AV)...
Thus, have to agree: following/serving/obeying a Secondary Created being as "a god" they call 'Jesus'
would Definitely be idolatry, According To "What Saith The Scriptures", Correct?:
"And God Spake all These Words, Saying, I AM The LORD Thy God, Which have brought thee
out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven
above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow
down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I The LORD Thy God AM A Jealous God..."
(Exodus 20:1-5 AV)
Certainly This 'Jealous God' Is The Same "New OWNER" Of His "Purchased [ By His Own Precious BLOOD ] Possession!", "Indwelt By The Omnipresent Holy Spirit"!
(Ephesians 1:14 cp 1 Corinthians 6:19 AV)
Best we can do now for those "following Another Jesus" is to "keep praying for them" to
"Receive The Love Of The Truth", eh?
Amen.
ps. Extra Enjoyable "Rightly Divided" study:
The Bible: The BIG Picture
Triumph1300
Well-Known Member
So, according to you United Pentecostals are not Christians?
They see God as having various forms / modes / manifestations— some see Jesus Christ as the one God, who sometimes manifests Himself as the Father or as the Holy Spirit.
The core doctrine of Oneness Pentecostal / Jesus Only is that Jesus IS the Father and Jesus IS the Spirit. There is one God who reveals Himself in different "modes."
Triumph1300
Well-Known Member
I don't think that's true.
The local UPC in our community preaches that Jesus is God.
(At the same time in another later comment you declared them to be "Christian", yet here you say they are not Christian. There was mention made about "doublespeak", I think that's correct.)
Big Boy Johnson
Well-Known Member
1 John 2:23
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
It's not automatic that a person goes to hell just because they say they believe in Jesus only such as the united pentecostals denomination.
Early on (back in the 80s) I went to a UPC for a while
I wouldn't go to one now because they have women in authority over men (not biblical) and they like to lay hands on people when praying and try to push them over claiming that's the Holy Spirit wanting to make them "slain in the spirit" along with other such false doctrine. (I experienced this when visiting the local UPC church in my area)
In God's Word those truly worshiping God fells forward while God's enemies fell backward like the UPC people try to do when they pray for you.
Not to mention most Pentecostals now days like to drink the booze, smoke cigarettes, and get remarried multiple times like all the other false church members at other churches. So I'll pass on the UPC / Pentecostals.
I know what God did in 3 languages.
And I will no longer be posting to someone that is UNABLE to have normal conversation
and spends his time on this Forum insulting persons.
I know what God did in 3 languages.
And I will no longer be posting to someone that is UNABLE to have normal conversation
and spends his time on this Forum insulting persons.
Yes ma'am.
There's a commandment against idolatry.
It's forbidden.
Now, let's dig a bit deeper.
The Catholic Church teaches that Jesus is God.
Those that claim that Jesus is not God, also hate the CC.
Interesting isn't it?
Just an observance.
They probably, maybe, hate all that believe that Jesus is God - this I cannot know.
Those that do not believe Jesus is God are following a DIFFERENT Jesus.
They are NOT following the Jesus of the New Testament.
Thus, they cannot be Christian.
Christians follow the Jesus of the New Testament.
And THAT Jesus is God.
There are other reasons, why some that call themselves Christian are not, but that one should suffice.
So you believe Jesus is God?
I stated that someone that does NOT believe Jesus is God is Christian??
You'd have to post the number of the reply where I stated that.
It has become abundantly clear to me that some define themselves as Christian but then go on to create their own religion.
And it's not the Christian one, so I strongly believe that unless one is following the Christian religion....they should not claim to be Christian.
Triumph
What you're describing above is MODULISM.
It's a heresy that was found to be taught in the early church and which was banned by the early Christians.
This is what happens when we move away from Christian theology and what was taught from the beginning.
God did NOT manifest Himself in different MODES.
GOD IS ONE.
But in One God are 3 PERSONS....
NOT natures, NOT essence, but Persons.
With ONE NATURE
ONE WILL
ONE ETERNAL EXISTANCE.
God was not making believe to be THE SON.
God was not making beleive to be THE HOLY SPIRIT.
- Status
Similar threads
